Skip to content
Elevate Rapid City at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Elevate Rapid City

Elevate the rapid city region for all.

$858k
Granted FY2024still arriving
9
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$201k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Community Improvement$1.3MEmployment$207kHuman Services$130kEducation$78kEnvironment$30kPhilanthropy$25kHousing & Shelter$16kReligion$8kOther$0
02FY2024 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $471,386, the rows itemized in this filing. The $857,836 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $386,450 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k6 grants · $169k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $303k
$49,686
Median grant
1
States reached
$35M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SOUTH DAKOTA ELLSWORTH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY$201,004
PHASE TECHNOLOGIES$51,800
RURAL AMERICA INITIATIVES$50,000
LIL PUNKINS DAYCARE$49,874
YMCA OF RAPID CITY$49,686
BLACK HILLS BEHAVIOR LLC$30,126
WESTERN DAKOTA VOCATIONAL TECHNICAL FOUNDATION INC$18,775
BLACK HILLS STATE UNIVERSITY$10,121
MAIN STREET SQUARE$10,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY24–24, $50k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%YMCA OF RAPID CITY: $50k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

72%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.2M · 5 repeat orgs$456k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
13

Total granted

$1.2M
$276k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+28%
+103%

Still filing today

40%
31%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 62% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $180k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’20’21’22’23’24
Community ImprovementPhilanthropyPublic BenefitHuman ServicesOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • SD
    SOUTH DAKOTA ELLSWORTH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
    5× · 2020–2024 · $901k
  • PT
    PHASE TECHNOLOGIES
    2× · 2023–2024 · $162k
  • MS
    MAIN STREET SQUARE
    3× · 2022–2024 · $37k · revenue +11%

Funded once

  • VR
    VISIT RAPID CITYgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $142k · revenue +158%
  • UW
    UNITED WAY OF THE BLACK HILLS
    one grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue -28%
  • WD
    WESTERN DAKOTA REGIONAL WATER SYSTEM
    one grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue -11%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
South Dakota Rural Electric Association

To serve the rural electric cooperatives in south dakota, to promote the effective development of rural electrification in south dakota on a cooperative, non-profit basis.

—
2
Western Electricity Coordinating Council

To effectively and efficiently mitigate risks to the reliability and security of the western interconnection's bulk power system.

Public Benefit
3
Watertown Development Company

Economic development in the watertown, south dakota area.

—
4
South Dakota Retailers Association

Representing the interest of retail businesses who sell retail products and services throughout the state of south dakota.

—
5
Regional West Health Services

Health care services for the people of western nebraska and eastern wyoming.

Health
6
North Dakota Rural Water Systems Association

To educate, support, and lead its members in providing quality service to their customers.

Employment
7
Dubuque Area Convention and Visitors Bureau

The Dubuque Area Convention & Visitors Bureau (CVB) will lead tourism destination promotion and development to enhance and expand the Dubuque Area experience.

Community Improvement
8
Downtown Sioux Falls

Downtown Sioux Falls boldly leads the downtown community by championing diverse experiences, economic growth, and a healthy environment.

—
9
Sd Association of Healthcare Organizations

Advancing healthy communities through a unified voice across the health care continuum.

—
10
Lake Agassiz Regional Development Corporation

To identify and provide financing opportunities and technical assistance to emerging and existing businesses, provide community and economic development planning and implementation for the long-term sustainability and growth of the region,…

—
11
International Downtown Association

To further the improvement of downtowns and their adjacent neighborhoods.

—
12
Mobile Area Chamber of Commerce

Community and economic development

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Elevate Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is South Dakota Trade Association. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

10 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 10 of the 23 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SOUTH DAKOTA ELLSWORTH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY: $901,012 · OtherSOUTH DAKOTA ELLSWORTH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYPHASE TECHNOLOGIES: $162,400 · OtherPHASE TECHNOLOGIESLIL PUNKINS DAYCARE: $49,874 · Other+12 more: $159,696 · Other+12 moreVISIT RAPID CITY: $142,158 · Community ImprovementVISIT RAPID CIT…RURAL AMERICA INITIATIVES: $50,000 · Community ImprovementRURAL AMERICA I…MAIN STREET SQUARE: $37,000 · Community ImprovementMAIN STREET SQU…South Dakota Trade Association: $10,000 · Community ImprovementBLACK HILLS AREA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $150,000 · PhilanthropyBLACK HILLS…UNITED WAY OF THE BLACK HILLS: $25,000 · PhilanthropyUNITED WAY …RAPID CITY Y M C A: $49,686 · Human ServicesWESTERN DAKOTA REGIONAL WATER SYSTEM: $25,000 · Public Benefit
Other$1,272,982Community Improvement$239,158Philanthropy$175,000Human Services$49,686Public Benefit$25,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBLACK HILLS AREA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $150,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetVISIT RAPID CITY: $142,158 over 1y, 10% of budgetRURAL AMERICA INITIATIVES: $50,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetRAPID CITY Y M C A: $49,686 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetMAIN STREET SQUARE: $37,000 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetWESTERN DAKOTA VOCATIONAL TECHNICAL FOUNDATION INC: $27,838 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetUNITED WAY OF THE BLACK HILLS: $25,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetWESTERN DAKOTA REGIONAL WATER SYSTEM: $25,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetSouth Dakota Trade Association: $10,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds BLACK HILLS AREA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds VISIT RAPID CITY ↗
  • Who funds RURAL AMERICA INITIATIVES ↗
  • Who funds RAPID CITY Y M C A ↗
  • Who funds MAIN STREET SQUARE ↗
  • Who funds WESTERN DAKOTA VOCATIONAL TECHNICAL FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds UNITED WAY OF THE BLACK HILLS ↗
  • Who funds WESTERN DAKOTA REGIONAL WATER SYSTEM ↗
  • Who funds South Dakota Trade Association ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

South Dakota Communit…First Interstate Banc…Gwendolyn L Stearns F…John T Vucurevich Fou…Black Hills Area Comm…American Gift FundDonor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
South Dakota Community FoundationSD15.3× affinity5 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: South Dakota Community Foundation · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · Gwendolyn L Stearns Foundation Inc · John T Vucurevich Foundation · Black Hills Area Community Foundation · American Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Elevate Rapid City funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Elevate Rapid City. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 23 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Elevate Rapid City’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home