Skip to content

· Public charity

Ohio Corn Marketing Program

To promote ohio corn for ohio corn producers

$2.2M
Granted FY2025still arriving
19
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$867k
Largest
01What it funds
0198% 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$15MEducation$3.7MScience & Tech$1.2MHealth$275kArts & Culture$125kRecreation & Sports$97kCommunity Improvement$10kOther$0
02FY2025 · 19 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k11 grants · $338k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $377k
  • $250k+3 grants · $1.5M
$45,600
Median grant
8
States reached
$6.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NATIONAL CORN GROWERS ASSOC$867,380
US GRAINS COUNCIL$343,000
THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATIO$284,546
EDUCATION PROJECTS & PARTNERSHIPS$176,583
US MEAT EXPORT FEDERATION$75,000
THE BIG TEN NETWORK$75,000
SINCLAIR BROADCAST GROUP$50,000
OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY$49,042
OHIO CORN AND WHEAT GROWERS ASSOCIA$47,411
OHIO FFA$45,600
OTPA$45,000
IOWA CORN OPPORTUNITIES LLC$39,136
FARMGATE INSIGHTS LLC$37,000
OACI$19,000
OCMP$18,421
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 92% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%US GRAINS COUNCIL: $1.2M → 14%IOWA CORN GROWERS ASSOCIATION: $51k → 10%NATIONAL CORN GROWERS ASSOC: $986k → 11%US MEAT EXPORT FEDERATION: $105k → 12%OHIO CORN AND WHEAT GROWERS ASSOCIA: $376k → 5%THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATIO: $285k → 15%THE BIG TEN NETWORK: $75k → 14%SINCLAIR BROADCAST GROUP: $50k → 11%THORTONS: $80k → 15%US GRAINS COUNCIL: $884k → 14%NATIONAL CORN GROWERS ASSOC: $867k → 11%US MEAT EXPORT FEDERATION: $75k → 12%OHIO CORN AND WHEAT GROWERS ASSOCIA: $334k → 5%THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATIO: $65k → 15%UNITED DAIRY FARMERS: $56k → 16%US GRAINS COUNCIL: $803k → 14%NATIONAL CORN GROWERS ASSOC: $864k → 11%US MEAT EXPORT FEDERATION: $75k → 12%OHIO CORN AND WHEAT GROWERS ASSOCIA: $155k → 5%THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATIO: $61k → 15%US GRAINS COUNCIL: $802k → 14%CASEY'S GENERAL STORES: $60k → 10%NATIONAL CORN GROWERS ASSOC: $844k → 11%US MEAT EXPORT FEDERATION: $70k → 12%OHIO CORN AND WHEAT GROWERS ASSOCIA: $134k → 5%US GRAINS COUNCIL: $796k → 14%NATIONAL CORN GROWERS ASSOC: $777k → 11%OHIO CORN AND WHEAT GROWERS ASSOCIA: $126k → 5%US GRAINS COUNCIL: $780k → 14%NATIONAL CORN GROWERS ASSOC: $773k → 11%OHIO CORN AND WHEAT GROWERS ASSOCIA: $101k → 5%US GRAINS COUNCIL: $356k → 14%NATIONAL CORN GROWERS ASSOC: $752k → 11%OHIO CORN AND WHEAT GROWERS ASSOCIA: $83k → 5%US GRAINS COUNCIL: $351k → 14%NATIONAL CORN GROWERS ASSOC: $718k → 11%OHIO CORN AND WHEAT GROWERS ASSOCIA: $52k → 5%US GRAINS COUNCIL: $343k → 14%NATIONAL CORN GROWERS ASSOC: $539k → 11%OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $345k → 15%OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $194k → 15%OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $186k → 15%OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $153k → 15%OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $98k → 15%OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $56k → 15%OACI: $90k → 15%GEOSYNTEC: $57k → 15%FFA: $54k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
MI
IA
OH
PA
CO
NE
MO
KY
MD
DC
GA
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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$20M · 22 repeat orgs$675k to everyone else

22 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

22
13

Total granted

$20M
$388k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+9%
+16%

Still filing today

50%
15%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $287k 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
Food & NutritionEducationOther
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

  • NC
    NATIONAL CORN GROWERS ASSOCIATION
    9× · 2017–2025 · $7.1M · revenue +2%
  • UG
    US GRAINS COUNCIL
    9× · 2017–2025 · $6.3M · revenue +42%
  • OC
    OHIO CORN AND WHEAT GROWER'S ASSOCIATION
    9× · 2017–2025 · $1.4M · revenue +5% · 28% of their budget

Funded once

  • T
    THORTONS
    one grant, 2021 · $80k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2020 · $60k
  • UD
    UNITED DAIRY FARMERS
    one grant, 2021 · $56k
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
Missouri Corn Growers Association

The Missouri Corn Growers Association is a grassroots organization directed by its members dedicated to increasing the profitability of corn production by developing and expanding corn markets; collecting and distributing information;…

—
2
Ohio Agribusiness Association

To promote the interest of the ohio agribusiness industry and those engaged in the agribusiness industry through education, legislative activities public relations, and research.

—
3
Organic Farmers Association

The mission of the Organic Farmers Association is to provide a strong and unified national voice for domestic certified organic producers so that organic agriculture will become the basis of a viable United States food and agricultural…

Food & Nutrition
4
Iowa Corn Promotion Board

The iowa corn promotion board (icpb) works to develop and defend markets, fund research, and provide education about corn and corn products. icpb's mission is to create opportunities for long term iowa corn grower profitability.

—
5
South Dakota Corn Growers Association

Promote corn and corn products and improve corn profitability. influence public policy and increase corn usage through livestock feeding and new domestic products.

—
6
Agribusiness Association of Iowa

The agribusiness association of iowa exists to advocate communicate and educate on behalf of a professional agribusiness industry.

—
7
National Council of Farmer Cooperatives

To advance the business and policy interests of america's cooperatives and other farmer-owned enterprises.

—
8
Indiana Agribusiness Council Inc

An agribusiness network advocate, representing members' interests within all levels of government and keeping members informed of the latest industry trends and news.

—
9
Illinois Corn Growers Association

To create and maintain opportunities for illinois corn growers to capture more value for their product. in order to fulfill our mission, the organization conducts governmental affairs activities at all levels,market development projects,…

—
10
Illinois Pork Producers Association

To improve the quality, production efficiency, and promotion of pork. representation and advocacy in regulatory and policy issues affecting the pork industry.

—
11
Kansas Corn Growers Association

To promote and improve the profitability of kansas corn farmers by developing and maintaining domestic and international markets to utilize kansas and us corn production.

Food & Nutrition
12
Ohio County & Independent Agricultural Societies
Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ohio Cattlemen's Association; the most unlike its peers is Ohio Ffa Camps Inc. 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

14 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. 14 of the 43 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
11/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

US GRAINS COUNCIL: $6,300,729 · OtherUS GRAINS COUNCILOHIO CORN AND WHEAT GROWER'S ASSOCIATION: $1,407,951 · OtherOHIO CORN AND WHEAT GROWER'S ASSOCIATIONEDUCATION PROJECTS & PARTNERSHIPS: $1,356,053 · OtherEDUCATION PROJECTS & PARTNERSHIPSOHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $1,081,852 · OtherOHIO STATE UNIVERSITYUNITED STATES MEAT EXPORT FEDERATION INC: $575,000 · Other+36 more: $1,948,063 · Other+36 moreNATIONAL CORN GROWERS ASSOCIATION: $7,120,376 · Food & NutritionNATIONAL CORN GROWERS ASSOCIATIONOHIO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $409,971 · Education
Other$12,669,648Food & Nutrition$7,120,376Education$409,971

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 budgetNATIONAL CORN GROWERS ASSOCIATION: $7,120,376 over 9y, 5.0% of budgetUS GRAINS COUNCIL: $6,300,729 over 9y, 4.6% of budgetOHIO CORN AND WHEAT GROWER'S ASSOCIATION: $1,407,951 over 9y, 28% of budgetUNITED STATES MEAT EXPORT FEDERATION INC: $575,000 over 9y, 0.2% of budgetOHIO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $409,971 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetOHIO FFA CAMPS INC: $97,070 over 2y, 3.4% of budgetIOWA CORN GROWER'S ASSOCIATION: $77,242 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetUSA POULTRY & EGG EXPORT COUNCIL: $49,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetNEBRASKA CORN GROWERS ASSOCIATION: $40,000 over 1y, 8.1% of budgetOHIO CATTLEMEN'S ASSOCIATION: $15,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetTHE CENTER FOR FOOD INTEGRITY INC: $10,530 over 1y, 0.5% 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 NATIONAL CORN GROWERS ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds US GRAINS COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds OHIO CORN AND WHEAT GROWER'S ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds UNITED STATES MEAT EXPORT FEDERATION INC ↗
  • Who funds OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds OHIO FFA CAMPS INC ↗
  • Who funds OHIO FFA FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds IOWA CORN GROWER'S ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds Our Ohio Communications Inc ↗
  • Who funds USA POULTRY & EGG EXPORT COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds NEBRASKA CORN GROWERS ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds OHIO CATTLEMEN'S ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds THE CENTER FOR FOOD INTEGRITY INC ↗
  • Who funds OHIO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ↗

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Indiana Corn Marketing CouncilIN13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Indiana Corn Marketing Council

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 Ohio Corn Marketing Program funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ohio Corn Marketing Program. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%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
    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 43 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 Ohio Corn Marketing Program’s filings →

    More from the funding graph