Skip to content
Heartland Conservation Alliance at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Heartland Conservation Alliance

The HEARTLAND CONSERVATION ALLIANCE works with partners to protect, connect, and restore the blue river watershed and its urban greenspaces for the benefit and enjoyment of all.

$137k
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$48k
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, FY2018 to 2024.

Environment$215kHuman Services$123kEmployment$113kCommunity Improvement$103kRecreation & Sports$27kHousing & Shelter$8kYouth Development$8kHealth$8kOther$0
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $66,905, the rows itemized in this filing. The $136,905 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $70,000 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.
$47,505
Median grant
2
States reached
$832k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY$47,505
NATIVE LAND RESTORATION COLLABORATIVE$19,400
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 (FY18–23, $243k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%Cornerstones of Care: $99k → 15%CORNERSTONES OF CARE: $62k → 15%CORNERSTONES OF CARE: $54k → 15%MARLBOROUGH COMMUNITY COALITION: $13k → 15%MARLBOROUGH COMMUNITY COALITION: $7k → 15%MARLBOROUGH COMMUNITY COALITION: $7k → 15%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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$553k · 9 repeat orgs$57k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +124% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
6

Total granted

$553k
$57k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+124%
0%

Still filing today

67%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Community ImprovementHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentEnvironmentMembership BenefitOther
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

  • CO
    CORNERSTONES OF CARE
    3× · 2021–2023 · $215k · revenue +2%
  • MR
    MID-AMERICA REGIONAL COUNCIL COMMUNITY SERVICES CORPORATION
    3× · 2018–2020 · $65k · revenue +174%
  • MC
    MARLBOROUGH COMMUNITY COALITION INC
    3× · 2018–2020 · $27k · revenue +81%

Funded once

  • FE
    FOXTOWN EAST NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
    one grant, 2021 · $17k
  • THE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +49%
  • MR
    MY REGION WINS
    one grant, 2020 · $8k
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
North Central Kansas Housing Opportunities Inc
Community Improvement
2
Kansas City Community Land Trust

Acquire and develop real estate to provide safe, decent, and affordable housing to low-income homeowners while working to ensure a culturally, ethnically, and economically diverse and stable community where generations can thrive in place.

Housing & Shelter
3
Heartland Conservation Alliance

The heartland conservation alliance works with partners to protect, connect, and restore the blue river watershed and its urban greenspaces for the benefit and enjoyment of all.

Environment
4
Cultivate Kansas City Inc

Grow food, farms and community in support of a sustainable, healthy and local food system.

Food & Nutrition
5
National Corn Growers Association Foundation

Advance the interests of us corn farmers through research and education.

Food & Nutrition
6
Community Builders Network of Metro St Louis

The Community Builders Network of Metro St. Louis (CBN) is a coalition of community building organizations, including both place-based nonprofits and supporting partners. Our mission is to gather community leaders of all backgrounds to…

Community Improvement
7
Kansas City Community Gardens Inc

Kansas city community gardens is dedicated to improving the quality of life of low-income households and other members of the community by helping them grow their own nutritious fruits and vegatables. the member gardners develop…

Environment
8
Common Good Alliance

Founded by a group of passionate individuals, CGA champions the cause of economic and cultural equity within our vibrant communities. Since its inception, CGA has committed itself to fostering flourishing neighborhoods, ensuring that every…

Community Improvement
9
Kc Common Good Inc

Our mission is to create an environment where all citizens can live safely and have access to real opportunities.

Employment
10
Central Area Collaborative

To ensure the commercial vitality of the Central Area.

Community Improvement
11
Community Conservation Solutions

Develop integrated and science-based solutions to complex environmental problems to protect natural lands, water, wildlife and human communities.

—
12
Usa Green Communities
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Urban Neighborhood Initiative Inc; the most unlike its peers is Cornerstones of Care. 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

9 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. 9 of the 15 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
7/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CORNERSTONES OF CARE: $215,472 · Human ServicesCORNERSTONES OF CAREMARLBOROUGH COMMUNITY COALITION INC: $27,100 · Human ServicesMARLBOROUGH COMMUNITY COALITION INCMISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY: $143,261 · OtherMISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITYNATIVE LAND RESTORATION COLLABORATIVE: $26,716 · OtherNATIVE LAND RESTORATION COLLABORATIVEURBAN TRAIL CO: $20,000 · OtherURBAN TRAIL COFOXTOWN EAST NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: $17,250 · OtherFOXTOWN EAST NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONMY REGION WINS: $8,030 · OtherCLEMENT WATERS RETREAT: $7,500 · OtherMID-AMERICA REGIONAL COUNCIL COMMUNITY SERVICES CORPORATION: $65,054 · Community ImprovementMID-AMERICA REGIO…BLUE VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIO: $18,000 · Community ImprovementBLUE VALLEY NEIGH…URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD INITIATIVE INC: $12,500 · Community ImprovementURBAN NEIGHBORHOO…CONSERVATION LEGACY: $24,917 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS GROW CORP: $8,000 · Youth DevelopmentTHE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $10,000 · EnvironmentHeart of the City Neighborhood Association Inc: $6,000 · Membership Benefit
Human Services$242,572Other$222,757Community Improvement$95,554Youth Development$32,917Environment$10,000Membership Benefit$6,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCORNERSTONES OF CARE: $215,472 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetMID-AMERICA REGIONAL COUNCIL COMMUNITY SERVICES CORPORATION: $65,054 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetMARLBOROUGH COMMUNITY COALITION INC: $27,100 over 3y, 8.7% of budgetCONSERVATION LEGACY: $24,917 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetBLUE VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIO: $18,000 over 2y, 12% of budgetURBAN NEIGHBORHOOD INITIATIVE INC: $12,500 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetTHE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBOYS GROW CORP: $8,000 over 1y, 1.0% 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.

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.

The Shumaker Family F…The H & R Block Found…Community Capital FundHealth Forward Founda…Amazonsmile Foundation
The Shumaker Family FoundationKS15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Shumaker Family Foundation · The H & R Block Foundation · Community Capital Fund · Health Forward Foundation · 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 Heartland Conservation Alliance funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Heartland Conservation Alliance. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%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
    0get no government money at all
    1report 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, FY20–24
    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 15 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 Heartland Conservation Alliance’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