Skip to content
Howard County Experimental Association at a glance

· Private foundation

Howard County Experimental Association

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$21k
Granted FY2024still arriving
10
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$6k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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.

Education$84kFood & Nutrition$24kEnvironment$20kYouth Development$4kArts & Culture$3k
02FY2024 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$166k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CRESTWOOD DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS$6,000
HOWARD COUNTY SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT$4,000
RICEVILLE DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS$3,000
HOWARD COUNTY AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY$2,500
TURKEY VALLEY COMM SCH DIST$1,000
RICEVILLE SCHOOLS AG$1,000
HOWARD CTY ECON DEVEL$1,000
Individual grant recipient$1,000
HOWARD COUNTY 4H$1,000
CRESCO VFW POST 4561$500
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 2% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%RICEVILLE DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS: $6k → 9%TURKEY VALLEY COMM SCH DIST: $1k → 13%ISU FOUNDATION: $1k → 17%RICEVILLE DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS: $6k → 9%ISU FOUNDATION: $1k → 17%RICEVILLE DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS: $4k → 9%RICEVILLE SCHOOLS AG: $4k → 9%RICEVILLE DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS: $3k → 9%RICVEVILLE DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS: $3k → 9%RICEVILLE DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS: $3k → 9%RICEVILLE DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS: $3k → 9%RICEVILLE DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS: $3k → 9%RICEVILLE SCHOOLS AG: $1k → 9%RICEVILLE SCHOOLS AG: $1k → 9%RICEVILLE SCHOOLS AG: $1k → 9%LIDTKE MILL HISTORIC SITE: $1k → 9%LIDTKE MILL HISTORIC SITE: $1k → 9%CRESTWOOD DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS: $6k → 9%CRESTWOOD DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS: $6k → 9%CRESTWOOD DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS: $6k → 9%HOWARD COUNTY AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY: $5k → 9%HOWARD COUNTY AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY: $5k → 9%HOWARD COUNTY SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $5k → 9%HOWARD COUNTY SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $4k → 9%HOWARD COUNTY SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $4k → 9%HOW WINN CSD: $4k → 9%CRESTWOOD DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS: $3k → 9%CRESTWOOD DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS: $3k → 9%CRESTWOOD DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS: $3k → 9%CRESTWOOD DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS: $3k → 9%CRESTWOOD DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS: $3k → 9%HOWARD COUNTY AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY: $3k → 9%CHAMBER COMMERCE POSTER: $3k → 9%HOWARD COUNTY SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $3k → 9%HOWARD COUNTY AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY: $2k → 9%HOWARD COUNTY AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY: $2k → 9%HOWARD COUNTY AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY: $2k → 9%HOWARD COUNTY AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY: $2k → 9%HOWARD COUNTY AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY: $2k → 9%HOWARD COUNTY SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $2k → 9%HOWARD COUNTY SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $1k → 9%HOWARD COUNTY 4H: $1k → 9%HOWARD CTY ECON DEVEL: $1k → 9%HOW WINN CSD: $1k → 9%HOW WINN CSD: $1k → 9%HOWARD CTY ECON DEVEL: $1k → 9%HOWARD COUNTY 4H: $1k → 9%HOWARD CTY ECON DEVEL: $1k → 9%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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$127k · 10 repeat orgs$7k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
2

Total granted

$127k
$6k

Still filing today

20%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

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

  • CD
    CRESTWOOD DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS
    8× · 2017–2024 · $33k
  • RD
    RICEVILLE DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS
    7× · 2018–2024 · $28k
  • HC
    HOWARD COUNTY AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY
    8× · 2017–2024 · $21k · revenue +21%

Funded once

  • RD
    RICVEVILLE DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS
    one grant, 2017 · $3k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $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
04the grantee network

2 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. 2 of the 14 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
2/2
Grantees still filing
1/2
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CRESTWOOD DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS: $33,000 · OtherCRESTWOOD DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARSRICEVILLE DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS: $28,000 · OtherRICEVILLE DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARSHOWARD COUNTY AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY: $20,500 · OtherHOWARD COUNTY AGRICULTURAL SOCIETYHOWARD COUNTY SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $19,900 · OtherHOWARD COUNTY SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICTRICEVILLE SCHOOLS AG: $7,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $7,000 · Other+7 more: $16,500 · Other+7 moreIOWA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $2,000 · Education
Other$131,900Education$2,000

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 budgetHOWARD COUNTY AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY: $20,500 over 8y, 1.0% of budgetIOWA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $2,000 over 3y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds HOWARD COUNTY AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Howard County Experimental Association funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Howard County Experimental Association. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Howard County Experimental Association?

    Find your warmest path to Howard County Experimental Association through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 14 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-PF 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 Howard County Experimental Association’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