How much does IAA Foundation give?

IAA Foundation reported 69 itemized grants totaling $635,956, out of $926,902 in total grant expense reported on the return in its FY2024 IRS filing. It funded between 65 and 76 organizations a year over FY2017 to FY2023.

What does IAA Foundation fund?

By grant dollars over FY2017 to FY2024, its largest causes are Food & Nutrition (75%), Education (25%), Philanthropy (0%).

Who are IAA Foundation's largest grantees?

By total granted over FY2017 to FY2024: The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois ($206k), Agricultural Education Partnership - Logan Menard Sangamon County ($123k), Winnebago-Boone Farm Bureau ($74k).

Does IAA Foundation fund new organizations?

In FY2023, 0% of the organizations it funded were first-time grantees.

Which funders back the same organizations as IAA Foundation?

Its strongest co-funders, measured against what their size predicts, include Illinois Agricultural Association, The Growmark Foundation, Amazonsmile Foundation.

IAA Foundation

IAA Foundation at a glance Also receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

IAA Foundation

To fund education, research, and charitable activities that benefit Illinois farm families and agriculture.

$927k

Granted FY2024still arriving

Grants FY2024still arriving

States reached

$51k

Largest

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.

Food & Nutrition$3.8MEducation$1.3MPhilanthropy$8k

02FY2024 · 69 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured

The 69 grants below total $635,956, the rows itemized in this filing. The $926,902 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $290,946 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

Under $10k66 grants · $545k
$10k–50k2 grants · $40k
$50k–250k1 grant · $51k

$8,471

Median grant

States reached

$9.9M

Total assets

Largest grants
Recipient	Amount
University of Illinois	$50,628
Agricultural Edu Partnership	$24,621
Saline CFB Foundation	$15,754
Effingham CFB	$9,263
LaSalle CFB Foundation	$9,263
Macoupin County Ag Edu Found	$9,263
Adams CFB Foundation	$9,263
Cook CFB Foundation	$9,263
Madison County Caree	$9,263
DeKalb CFB	$9,263
Warren Henderson CFB Fndation	$9,263
Livingston County SWCD	$9,263
Winnebago CFB	$9,263
Edwards CFB	$9,263
Stephenson CFB	$9,263

02The need

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 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 80% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.

$4.9M · 116 repeat orgs$105k to everyone else

116 repeat relationships: 67 still active in FY2024, 49 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

116

Total granted

$4.9M

$90k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+36%

+66%

Still filing today

78%

82%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Food & NutritionEducationPhilanthropyRecreation & SportsOther

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

WF
WINNEBAGO-BOONE FARM BUREAU
8× · 2017–2024 · $74k · revenue +31%
DC
DEKALB COUNTY FARM BUREAU
8× · 2017–2024 · $74k · revenue +4%
EC
Edwards County Farm Bureau
8× · 2017–2024 · $73k · revenue +68%

Funded once

SC
Sangamon County Farm Bureaugraduated
one grant, 2017 · $9k · revenue +56%
OC
OGLE COUNTY FARM BUREAUgraduated
one grant, 2017 · $9k · revenue +123%
SC
Shelby County Farm Bureau
one grant, 2021 · $9k · revenue +23%

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.

Jefferson County Farm Bureau

To improve the economic well being of agriculture in our communities

—

Marion County Farm BureauInc

To increase net income of farmers and ranchers and to improve the quality of rural life and work for the betterment of agriculture.

—

Mississippi Farm Bureau Young Farmer Scholarship Foundation

—

Fayette County Farm Bureau

To improve the economic well being of agriculture and enrich the quality of farm family life.

—

Cecil County Farm Bureau

Promotion of agricultural issues

—

Calhoun County Farm Bureau

Providing information, representation, and services to improve the quality of life that reflects our agricultural heritage in calhoun county.

—

Newton County Farm Bureau Inc

Agriculture promotion

—

Greene County Farm Bureau

Providing information, representation, and services to improve the quality of life that reflects our agricultural heritage in greene county.

—

Lee County Farm BureauInc

Lee County Farm Bureau's mission is to work for the betterment of agriculture in Lee county.

—

Santa Clara County Farm Bureau

To work for solutions to the problems of the farm and rural community by use of organized action. to represent, protect, and advance the social, economic and educational interests of the farmers of santa clara county.

—

Schuyler County Farm Bureau

To improve the economic well-being of agriculture and enrich the quality of farm family life.

—

Midland County Farm Bureau

Midland county farm bureau is an independent, non-governmental, voluntary organization of farm families united for the purpose of analyzing their challenges and formulating action to achieve educational improvement, economic opportunity,…

—

How this is measured

The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Dupage County Farm Bureau; the most unlike its peers is Whiteside County Farm Bureau Foundation. 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

103 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. 103 of the 129 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.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

101/103

Grantees still filing

89/103

Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Other$4,178,399Food & Nutrition$421,324Philanthropy$209,316Education$194,319Recreation & Sports$31,913

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

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.

Illinois Agricultural AssociationIL117.7× affinity54 shared granteesties to 1 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Illinois Agricultural Association · The Growmark 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 IAA Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from IAA Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24’25

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

0get no government money at all

11report 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 IAA Foundation?

Find your warmest path to IAA Foundation 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.

Play a game based on IAA’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