Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Planned Parenthood Minnesota North Dakota South Dakota

Affirming human rights to reproductive health and freedom.

$337k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$321k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Health$17MHuman Services$298kCommunity Improvement$118kEducation$30k
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
  • $250k+1 grant · $321k
$320,928
Median grant
1
States reached
$18M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PLANNED PARENTHOOD MINNESOTA NORTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA ACTION FUND$320,928
RICHFIELD HIGH SCHOOL$10,000
02The need
03

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $13.9M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%SOUTHEASTERN MN COMMUNITY ACTION COUNCIL: $70k → 8%PLANNED PARENTHOOD MINNESOTA NORTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA FUND: $6.2M → 14%SOUTHEASTERN MN COMMUNITY ACTION COUNCIL: $52k → 8%PLANNED PARENTHOOD MINNESOTA NORTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA FUND: $2.9M → 14%SOUTHEASTERN MN COMMUNITY ACTION COUNCIL: $45k → 8%PLANNED PARENTHOOD MINNESOTA NORTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA FUND: $1.6M → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD MINNESOTA NORTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA FUND: $1.1M → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD MINNESOTA NORTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA FUND: $909k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD MINNESOTA NORTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA FUND: $511k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD MINNESOTA NORTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA FUND: $428k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD NORTH CENTRAL STATES FOUNDATION: $91k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge
repeat funding

Who you back again

Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$17M · 6 repeat orgs$125k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +54% since the first grant, against +33% for the ones you funded once.

6 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
4

Total granted

$17M
$125k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+54%
+33%

Still filing today

83%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
Human ServicesHealthCommunity ImprovementEducationOther

First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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

  • PP
    PLANNED PARENTHOOD NORTH CENTRAL STATES FOUNDATION
    8× · 2017–2024 · $14M · revenue +967% · 81% of their budget
  • S
    SEMCAC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $167k · revenue +53%
  • MC
    MAHUBE-OTWA COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $131k · revenue +60%

Funded once

  • PP
    PLANNED PARENTHOOD VOTERS OF IOWAgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $47k · revenue +33%
  • PP
    PLANNED PARENTHOOD NORTH CENTRAL STATES
    one grant, 2022 · $39k · revenue +15%
  • HH
    HENNEPIN HEALTHCARE SYSTEM INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $29k · revenue +69%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Minnesota Medical Association

To be the leading voice of medicine to make minnesota the healthiest state and the best place to practice.

2
Minnesota Business Partnership

The minnesota business partnership's mission is to maintain a high quality of life for all minnesotans by ensuring that the state's economy remains strong, globally competitive and its prospects for growth bright by working with elected…

3
Planned Parenthood Alliance Advocates Serving Ak Hi Id in Ky and Wa

Ppaa promotes and protects reproductive health, rights, and justice.

Health
4
Minnesota Chamber of Commerce and Industry

The minnesota chamber of commerce proactively leads the business community statewide to: advance pro-business, responsible minnesota public policy that creates jobs and grows the econony; provde member services to address evolving business…

5
Planned Parenthood of the Heartland Foundation

Supporting planned parenthood of the heartland, inc.

6
Women Winning

To encourage, promote, support, and elect pro-choice women of all political parties to all levels of public office in minnesota.

Public Benefit
7
Planned Parenthood of Greater Washington and North Idaho

To provide exceptional reproductive and complementary health care services, honest education, and advocacy for all.

Health
8
Planned Parenthood Voters of Nebraska

Planned parenthood voters of nebraska inspires and engages nebraskans to take up the cause of reproductive rights, health, education, and related topics through education, grassroots organizing, and legislative advocacy.

9
Mn Community Measurement

Mn community measurement empowers stakeholders with meaningful information to drive improvement.

Health
10
Planned Parenthood of Northern Central and Southern New Jersey Inc

Planned parenthood of northern, central, and southern new jersey provides confidential, affordable, high-quality health care. we protect and promote the fundamental right of all individuals to make their own personal health decisions.…

Health
11
Minneapolis Regional Chamber of Commerce

Creating powerful advocacy to enhance economic vitality in the minneapolis-st. paul region.

12
Minnesota Hospital Association

Advance the health of individuals and communities through leadership, advocacy and collaboration on behalf of minnesota hospitals and health systems. vision: minnesotans are healthy and have access to the right care at the right time in…

Community Improvement

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Planned Parenthood North Central States and the most unlike its peers is Southwestern Mn Opportunity Council. 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 one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 9 of the 10 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
7/9
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

PLANNED PARENTHOOD NORTH CENTRAL STATES FOUNDATION — $13,734,056 · Human ServicesPLANNED PARENTHOOD NORTH CENTRAL STATES FOUNDATION+1 more — $166,875 · Human ServicesPLANNED PARENTHOOD MINNESOTA NORTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA ACTION FUND — $3,127,213 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD MI…MAHUBE-OTWA COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC — $130,786 · Other+2 more — $66,663 · OtherSouthwestern MN Opportunity Council — $117,752 · Community ImprovementPLANNED PARENTHOOD NORTH CENTRAL STATES — $39,368 · HealthHENNEPIN HEALTHCARE SYSTEM INC — $28,847 · HealthHIAWATHA ACADEMIES — $10,000 · Education
Human Services$13,900,931Other$3,324,662Community Improvement$117,752Health$68,215Education$10,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD NORTH CENTRAL STATES FOUNDATION — $13,734,056 over 8y, 81% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD MINNESOTA NORTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA ACTION FUND — $3,127,213 over 9y, 40% of budgetSEMCAC — $166,875 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetMAHUBE-OTWA COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC — $130,786 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetSouthwestern MN Opportunity Council — $117,752 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD VOTERS OF IOWA — $46,663 over 1y, 15% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD NORTH CENTRAL STATES — $39,368 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHENNEPIN HEALTHCARE SYSTEM INC — $28,847 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHIAWATHA ACADEMIES — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them

A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Planned Parenthood Action Fund IncNY13.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Planned Parenthood Action Fund Inc · The Minneapolis Foundation

Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization Planned Parenthood Minnesota North Dakota South Dakota funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%your share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%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 · 0–50%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 10 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph