Skip to content
Feeding South Dakota at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Feeding South Dakota

To eliminate hunger in south dakota.

$1.8M
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$12k
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 2025.

Food & Nutrition$334kHuman Services$2kCivil Rights$2k
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 10 grants below total $71,119, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,806,689 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $1,735,570 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k7 grants · $37k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $34k
$8,587
Median grant
2
States reached
$23M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AMERICAN INDIAN YOUTH RUNNING STRONG$12,107
SPEARFISH COMMUNITY PANTRY$11,977
THE MUSTARD SEED$10,374
FEEDING VERMILLION$9,260
FOOD FOR THOUGHT SCHOOL PANTRY$8,587
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN - MCINTOSH$6,966
NEEDS ANONYMOUS INC$3,999
MOBIDGE MINISTERIAL ASSOCIATION$3,848
ELK POINT UNITED PARISH$3,498
BERESFORD SET FREE$503
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 (FY17–25, $68k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 71% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%HAWKWING INC: $3k → 11%AMERICAN INDIAN YOUTH RUNNING STRONG: $12k → 6%CLEAR LAKE ICAP: $200 → 9%INTERLAKES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $2k → 10%IPSWICH TIGER POST COMMUNITY EDUCATION CENTER: $223 → 10%TRI-COUNTY GOOD SAMARITAN: $407 → 12%COMMUNITY CONNECTIONS INC: $863 → 20%HAWKWING INC: $2k → 11%AMERICAN INDIAN YOUTH RUNNING STRONG: $7k → 6%INTER-LAKES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC: $148 → 9%INTERLAKES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $1k → 10%TRI-COUNTY GOOD SAMARITAN: $402 → 12%COMMUNITY CONNECTIONS INC: $736 → 20%HAWKWING INC: $2k → 11%INTERLAKES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $1k → 10%TRI-COUNTY GOOD SAMARITAN: $396 → 12%COMMUNITY CONNECTIONS INC: $729 → 20%HAWKWING INC: $2k → 11%INTERLAKES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $1k → 10%TRI-COUNTY GOOD SAMARITAN: $376 → 12%COMMUNITY CONNECTIONS INC: $708 → 20%HAWKWING INC: $2k → 11%INTERLAKES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $904 → 10%TRI-COUNTY GOOD SAMARITAN: $364 → 12%COMMUNITY CONNECTIONS INC: $627 → 20%HAWKWING INC: $1k → 11%INTERLAKES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $874 → 10%TRI-COUNTY GOOD SAMARITAN: $353 → 12%COMMUNITY CONNECTIONS INC - WINNER: $575 → 20%TRI-COUNTY GOOD SAMARITAN: $346 → 12%COMMUNITY CONNECTIONS INC: $174 → 20%IPSWICH TIGER POST COMMUNITY EDUCATION CENTER INC: $56 → 10%TRI-COUNTY GOOD SAMARITAN CENTER: $244 → 12%COMMUNITY CONNECTIONS INC: $86 → 20%HURON AREA SENIOR CENTER: $228 → 15%THE MUSTARD SEED: $10k → 25%TREE OF LIFE: $3k → 40%TREE OF LIFE: $2k → 40%HAWKWING INC: $2k → 25%TREE OF LIFE: $2k → 40%HAWKWING INC: $1k → 25%TREE OF LIFE: $2k → 40%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.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$298k · 43 repeat orgs$41k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +22% since the first grant, against +8% for those funded once.

43 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2025, 34 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

43
15

Total granted

$298k
$30k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+22%
+8%

Still filing today

37%
20%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesFood & NutritionCommunity ImprovementPhilanthropyReligionOther
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

  • AI
    AMERICAN INDIAN YOUTH RUNNING STRONG INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $20k · revenue +21%
  • NA
    Needs Anonymous Inc
    9× · 2017–2025 · $11k · revenue +192%
  • RO
    RURAL OFFICE OF COMMUNITY SERVICES
    9× · 2017–2025 · $10k · revenue +335%

Funded once

  • SO
    SOCIETY OF INDIAN MISSIONS INCORPORATED 234 TAFT ST
    one grant, 2024 · $16k
  • TM
    THE MUSTARD SEED
    one grant, 2024 · $8k
  • SA
    SALVATION ARMY
    one grant, 2023 · $3k
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
Vermillion County Christian Food Center

Community food pantry

Food & Nutrition
2
Bread of Life Community Services
Food & Nutrition
3
Christs Food Center Inc

Provide emergency food to families experiencing disaster and assist low income seniors, disabled and veterans in monthly food needs

Food & Nutrition
4
Denison Soup Kitchen

Feeding the homeless and hungry

Human Services
5
Twin City Christian Center Inc

Food Pantry

—
6
Covenant Cupboard Food Pantry

Address the food insecurity needs in our community

Food & Nutrition
7
Big Timber Community Food Bank

Area food bank distributions

Food & Nutrition
8
Hickory County Cares

Food distribution to the needy

Human Services
9
South County Community Food Bank

Providing nutritious food to low income families and individuals in south clatsop county

Food & Nutrition
10
Brandon Area Food Pantry

To assist families and individuals in the Brandon, SD area meet emergency food needs at little or no cost.

Food & Nutrition
11
Turning Point Community Services Center Inc

Provide food for those in need living in the clatskanie oregon area.

Community Improvement
12
Cumby Food Pantry

food pantry

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Inter-Lakes Community Action Partnership Inc; the most unlike its peers is Ipswich Tiger Post Community Center. 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

28 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 28 of the 59 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)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
24/28
Grantees still filing
18/28
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE SALVATION ARMY: $49,336 · OtherTHE SALVATION ARMYROSEBUD SIOUX TRIBE: $23,103 · OtherROSEBUD SIOUX TRIBESOCIETY OF INDIAN MISSIONS INCORPORATED 234 TAFT ST: $15,979 · OtherSOCIETY OF INDIAN MISSIONS INCORPORATED 234 TAFT STFIRST PRESBYTERIAN - MCINTOSH: $12,796 · OtherFIRST PRESBYTERIAN - MCINTOSHNeeds Anonymous Inc: $10,555 · OtherRURAL OFFICE OF COMMUNITY SERVICES: $9,823 · OtherMOBRIDGE MINISTERIAL ASSOCIATION: $9,638 · OtherYANKTON AREA SENIOR CITIZEN: $9,462 · OtherTHE MUSTARD SEED: $7,867 · Other+33 more: $58,845 · Other+33 moreAMERICAN INDIAN YOUTH RUNNING STRONG INC: $19,528 · Human ServicesAMERICAN INDIAN YOUTH …HAWKWING INC: $15,217 · Human ServicesHAWKWING INCMUSTARD SEED: $10,374 · Human ServicesMUSTARD SEEDTREE OF LIFE MINISTRY: $8,217 · Human ServicesTREE OF LIFE MINISTRYINTER-LAKES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC: $6,960 · Human ServicesINTER-LAKES COMMUNITY …COMMUNITY CONNECTIONS INC: $4,498 · Human ServicesCOMMUNITY CONNECTIONS …TRI-COUNTY GOOD SAMARITAN CENTER: $2,888 · Human Services+2 more: $507 · Human ServicesSPEARFISH COMMUNITY PANTRY INC: $21,706 · Food & NutritionSPEARFISH COMMUNITY …YANKTON FOOD FOR THOUGHT: $15,845 · Food & NutritionYANKTON FOOD FOR THO…FEEDING VERMILLION: $13,526 · Food & NutritionFEEDING VERMILLIONMITCHELL FOOD PANTRY: $7,788 · Food & NutritionMITCHELL FOOD PANTRY+1 more: $1,130 · Food & NutritionGROW SOUTH DAKOTA: $2,282 · Community ImprovementBROOKINGS AREA UNITED WAY: $205 · PhilanthropyLOVE IN THE NAME OF CHRIST OF GREATER CANTON: $121 · Religion
Other$207,404Human Services$68,189Food & Nutrition$59,995Community Improvement$2,282Philanthropy$205Religion$121

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSPEARFISH COMMUNITY PANTRY INC: $21,706 over 2y, 7.0% of budgetAMERICAN INDIAN YOUTH RUNNING STRONG INC: $19,528 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetYANKTON FOOD FOR THOUGHT: $15,845 over 2y, 5.3% of budgetHAWKWING INC: $15,217 over 9y, 1.5% of budgetFEEDING VERMILLION: $13,526 over 6y, 2.8% of budgetNeeds Anonymous Inc: $10,555 over 9y, 2.8% of budgetRURAL OFFICE OF COMMUNITY SERVICES: $9,823 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetYANKTON AREA SENIOR CITIZEN: $9,462 over 9y, 0.5% of budgetTREE OF LIFE MINISTRY: $8,217 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetMITCHELL FOOD PANTRY: $7,788 over 9y, 1.6% of budgetINTER-LAKES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC: $6,960 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY CONNECTIONS INC: $4,498 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetCHRISTIAN SERVICE COUNCIL OF GRANT COUNTY: $4,378 over 9y, 0.2% of budgetCITIZENS INVOLVEMENT COUNCIL: $4,214 over 9y, 0.4% of budgetTRI-COUNTY GOOD SAMARITAN CENTER: $2,888 over 9y, 0.3% of budgetGROW SOUTH DAKOTA: $2,282 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetBON HOMME FOOD PANTRY: $1,130 over 6y, 0.6% of budgetOAHE INC: $812 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetIpswich Tiger Post Community Center: $279 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetHURON AREA SENIOR CENTER INC: $228 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBROOKINGS AREA UNITED WAY: $205 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLOVE IN THE NAME OF CHRIST OF GREATER CANTON: $121 over 1y, 0.2% 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 SPEARFISH COMMUNITY PANTRY INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN INDIAN YOUTH RUNNING STRONG INC ↗
  • Who funds YANKTON FOOD FOR THOUGHT ↗
  • Who funds HAWKWING INC ↗
  • Who funds FEEDING VERMILLION ↗
  • Who funds Needs Anonymous Inc ↗
  • Who funds MUSTARD SEED ↗
  • Who funds RURAL OFFICE OF COMMUNITY SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds YANKTON AREA SENIOR CITIZEN ↗
  • Who funds TREE OF LIFE MINISTRY ↗
  • Who funds MITCHELL FOOD PANTRY ↗
  • Who funds INTER-LAKES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY CONNECTIONS INC ↗
  • Who funds CHRISTIAN SERVICE COUNCIL OF GRANT COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds CITIZENS INVOLVEMENT COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds TRI-COUNTY GOOD SAMARITAN CENTER ↗
  • Who funds GROW SOUTH DAKOTA ↗

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…Land O'Lakes Foundati…Midcontinent Foundati…Sioux Falls Area Comm…Charities Aid Foundat…Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile FoundationFidelity Investments …
South Dakota Community FoundationSD36.8× affinity17 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: South Dakota Community Foundation · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · Land O'Lakes Foundation · Midcontinent Foundation · Sioux Falls Area Community Foundation Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Feeding South Dakota funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Feeding South Dakota. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%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
    1get 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 59 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Feeding South Dakota’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