Skip to content
Mid-South Food Bank at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Mid-South Food Bank

Collection & distribution of food to charitable organizations serving those in need.

$222k
Granted FY2022
12
Grants FY2022
1
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01FY2022 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$20,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$35M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNION COUNTY GOOD SAMARITAN$20,000
BELMONT UMC FOOD PANTRY$20,000
HIS COMPASSIONATE TOUCH HSC$20,000
FEEDING HEARTS FOOD PANTRY$20,000
SAINT LUKE FOOD PANTRY$20,000
SAMARITANS$20,000
CLARKSDALE COAHOMA MINISTRIES$19,989
QUITMAN COUNTY FOOD PANTRY$19,304
ABERDEEN LOAVES & FISHES FOOD PANTRY$19,280
TIPPAH COUNTY GOOD SAMARITAN- WALNUT$15,380
SAINT JAMES TEMPLE MISSION OUTREACH CENTER$14,996
TIPPAH COUNTY GOOD SAMARITAN-RIPLEY$13,154
02The need
02

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 (FY22–22, $29k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 17%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 17%TIPPAH COUNTY GOOD SAMARITAN- WALNUT: $15k → 16%TIPPAH COUNTY GOOD SAMARITAN-RIPLEY: $13k → 16%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 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
Tillman County Food Bank Foundation
—
2
Compassion Food Ministry of Ms Inc

Food To The Needy

Food & Nutrition
3
South County Community Food Bank

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

Food & Nutrition
4
Gods Pantry of Pulaski County Inc

A group comprised of individuals, church groups, civic organizations, and city and county officials joining together their efforts to provide Pulaski County residents food in emergency situations.

—
5
Inman Methodist Food Pantry

Food pantry

Food & Nutrition
6
Emergency Community Food Pantry

To provide food to those in need due to emergency situations.

Food & Nutrition
7
Storehouse Community Food Pantry

To provide temporary food assistance to citizens of Vicksburg and Warren County, Mississippi who suffer from Food Insecurity, that is not always knowing where there next meal will come from.

Food & Nutrition
8
Amen Inc

Feeding the hungry

Human Services
9
Cumby Food Pantry

food pantry

Food & Nutrition
10
Good Samaritan Hunger Center

Provide bags of groceries for in need families on a weekly basis.

Food & Nutrition
11
Adams County Food Pantry
Food & Nutrition
12
3G Food Pantry

Local food pantry serving those food insecurity.

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Feeding the Need; the most unlike its peers is Samaritans. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the 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 11 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
4/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Union County Good Samaritan Center: $20,000 · OtherUnion County Good Samaritan CenterSAMARITANS: $20,000 · OtherSAMARITANSSOUTH TISHOMINGO COUNTY FOOD PANTRY: $20,000 · OtherSOUTH TISHOMINGO COUNTY FOOD PANTRYDELTA MISSION OUTREACH MINISTRY AND ALLIANCE INC: $19,304 · OtherDELTA MISSION OUTREACH MINISTRY AND ALLIANCE INCSAINT JAMES TEMPLE MISSION OUTREACH CENTER: $14,996 · OtherSAINT JAMES TEMPLE MISSION OUTREACH CENTERST LUKE FOOD PANTRY: $20,000 · Food & NutritionST LUKE FOOD PANTRYCLARKSDALE COAHOMA COUNTY MINISTRIES INC: $19,989 · Food & NutritionCLARKSDALE COAHOMA C…TIPPAH COUNTY GOOD SAMARITAN CENTER INC: $28,534 · Human ServicesTIPPAH COUNTY …HIS COMPASSIONATE TOUCH HUMAN SERVICES CORP: $20,000 · ReligionHIS COMPAS…NORTH MISSISSIPPI COMMUNITY RESEARCH TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT I: $20,000 · EducationNORTH MISS…ABERDEEN LOAVES AND FISHES FOOD PANTRY: $19,280 · Civil RightsABERDEEN …
Other$94,300Food & Nutrition$39,989Human Services$28,534Religion$20,000Education$20,000Civil Rights$19,280

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTIPPAH COUNTY GOOD SAMARITAN CENTER INC: $28,534 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetUnion County Good Samaritan Center: $20,000 over 1y, 19% of budgetHIS COMPASSIONATE TOUCH HUMAN SERVICES CORP: $20,000 over 1y, 89% of budgetNORTH MISSISSIPPI COMMUNITY RESEARCH TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT I: $20,000 over 1y, 27% of budgetSAMARITANS: $20,000 over 1y, 29% of budgetCLARKSDALE COAHOMA COUNTY MINISTRIES INC: $19,989 over 1y, 9.1% of budgetABERDEEN LOAVES AND FISHES FOOD PANTRY: $19,280 over 1y, 13% 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Mid-South Food Bank funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Mid-South Food Bank. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%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
    3report 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.

    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 11 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2022, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Mid-South Food Bank’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