Skip to content

· Public charity

Planned Parenthood of the Heartland Inc

To provide, promote and protect reproductive and sexual health through health services, education and advocacy.

$1.2M
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$809k
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 2025.

Health$6.5MHuman Services$767kEducation$448kYouth Development$300kCrime & Legal$11k
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $35k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $69k
  • $250k+2 grants · $1.1M
$259,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$5.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PLANNED PARENTHOOD VOTERS OF NEBRASKA$808,580
PLANNED PARENTHOOD VOTERS OF IOWA$259,000
SANFORD COMMUNITY CENTER$69,037
UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN IOWA$35,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY17–22, $495k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 97% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%CRISIS INVERVENTION & ADVOCACY CENTER: $8k → 5%LUTHERAN SERVICES IN IOWA: $69k → 10%CRISIS INVERVENTION & ADVOCACY CENTER: $7k → 5%LUTHERAN SERVICES IN IOWA: $59k → 10%LUTHERAN SERVICES IN IOWA: $51k → 10%LUTHERAN SERVICES IN IOWA: $29k → 10%LUTHERAN SERVICES IN IOWA: $22k → 10%LUTHERAN SERVICES OF IOWA: $17k → 10%YOUNG WOMEN'S RECOURCE CENTER: $105k → 10%YOUNG WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER: $88k → 10%YOUNG WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER: $15k → 10%YOUNG WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER: $9k → 10%YOUNG WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER: $8k → 10%YOUNG WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER: $8k → 10%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 74% of Planned Parenthood of the Heartland Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 55% of the giving stays in MN; by stated purpose, 2%.

Planned Parenthood of the Heartland Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
$7.9M · 14 repeat orgs$124k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +37% since the first grant, against -2% for those funded once.

14 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
1

Total granted

$7.9M
$124k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+37%
-2%

Still filing today

79%
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 ServicesYouth DevelopmentHealthCrime & LegalOther
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

  • PP
    PLANNED PARENTHOOD VOTERS OF NEBRASKA
    9× · 2017–2025 · $3.4M · revenue +294% · 83% of their budget
  • PP
    PLANNED PARENTHOOD VOTERS OF IOWA
    9× · 2017–2025 · $2.0M · revenue +37% · 78% of their budget
  • PP
    PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF THE HEARTLAND FOUNDATION
    2× · 2018–2022 · $512k · revenue +284% · 33% of their budget

Funded once

  • PP
    PLANNED PARENTHOOD MINNESOTA NORTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA
    one grant, 2018 · $124k · revenue -2%
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
Ywca of Fort Dodge Ia

We are a state licensed substance abuse facility which functions to provide a clinically managed residence treatment center for women and women with children.

—
2
Iowa Chapter of Children's Advocacy Centers

To promote the development, growth and utilization of childrens advocacy centers and multidisciplinary teams to better serve Iowas abused and neglected children and their families.

Crime & Legal
3
Iowa Aces 360

To improve the health and well-being of all by empowering communities, organizations, and people to take informed actions to prevent and mitigate the lifelong effects of childhood adversity.

Health
4
Indiana Center for Prevention of Youth Abuse and Suicide

Child advocacy organization that focuses on the prevention of child sexual abuse and youth suicide.

Youth Development
5
Central Iowa Juvenile Detention Center

To provide a highly structured environment which emphasizes a safety and security to all juveniles while serving as a deterrent to criminal and anti-social behaviors. Working youth in the center and communities.

—
6
Ywca of Clinton Iowa

Ywca is dedicated to eliminating racism, empowering women and promoting peace, justice, freedom and dignity for all.

Human Services
7
Niad Center for Human Development Inc

The mission of crisis intervention service (cis) is to provide persons affected by domestic violence, sexual assault and homicide with professional, confidential, 24-hour services including safety and support and to prevent violence in our…

—
8
Community Youth Services

Empowers youth at-risk and their families to meet goals for safety, stability, belonging and success by providing a continuum of individualized services and advocacy.

Human Services
9
The Child Center of Ny Inc

The child center of ny strengthens children and families with skills, opportunities, and emotional support to build healthy, successful lives.

—
10
Children's Center

Children's center serves children, youth and families through comprehensive mental health services.

—
11
Rusk County Childrens Advocacy Center Inc

To prevent, treat, and reduce the trauma of the investigative process for child abuse victims and their non-offending family members.

Crime & Legal
12
Guadalupe County Children's Advocacy Center

To advocate for and provide services to children and families when there are allegations of abuse and neglect throughout the investigation,prosecution, treatment, and prevention of child abuse, and to reduce the trauma to childrent with…

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Lutheran Services in Iowa Inc; the most unlike its peers is Sanford Center. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

12 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. 12 of the 15 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)
12/12
Grantees still filing
8/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PLANNED PARENTHOOD VOTERS OF NEBRASKA: $3,412,496 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD VOTERS OF NEBRASKAPLANNED PARENTHOOD VOTERS OF IOWA: $2,007,840 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD VOTERS OF IOWAPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF THE HEARTLAND FOUNDATION: $511,665 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF THE HEARTLAND FOUNDATIONBOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA: $308,611 · OtherSANFORD CENTER: $272,446 · OtherMILLS COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH: $262,916 · Other+1 more: $139,655 · OtherLUTHERAN SERVICES IN IOWA INC: $246,197 · Human ServicesYOUNG WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER: $233,922 · Human Services+1 more: $14,913 · Human ServicesCHARLES DREW HEALTH CENTER INC: $188,862 · HealthPLANNED PARENTHOOD MINNESOTA NORTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA: $123,909 · HealthGIRLS INCORPORATED OF SIOUX CITY: $259,406 · Youth DevelopmentCOMMUNITY YOUTH CONCEPTS: $41,004 · Youth DevelopmentCHILDREN AND FAMILY URBAN MINISTRIES D/B/A CHILDREN AND FAMILY URBAN MOVEMENT: $11,291 · Crime & Legal
Other$6,915,629Human Services$495,032Health$312,771Youth Development$300,410Crime & Legal$11,291

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD VOTERS OF NEBRASKA: $3,412,496 over 9y, 83% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD VOTERS OF IOWA: $2,007,840 over 9y, 78% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF THE HEARTLAND FOUNDATION: $511,665 over 2y, 33% of budgetSANFORD CENTER: $272,446 over 4y, 11% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF SIOUX CITY: $259,406 over 5y, 9.0% of budgetLUTHERAN SERVICES IN IOWA INC: $246,197 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetYOUNG WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER: $233,922 over 6y, 8.1% of budgetCHARLES DREW HEALTH CENTER INC: $188,862 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD MINNESOTA NORTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA: $123,909 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCOMMUNITY YOUTH CONCEPTS: $41,004 over 5y, 1.1% of budgetCRISIS INTERVENTION & ADVOCACY CENTER: $14,913 over 2y, 0.4% 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 PLANNED PARENTHOOD VOTERS OF NEBRASKA ↗
  • Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD VOTERS OF IOWA ↗
  • Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF THE HEARTLAND FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SANFORD CENTER ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF SIOUX CITY ↗
  • Who funds LUTHERAN SERVICES IN IOWA INC ↗
  • Who funds YOUNG WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds CHARLES DREW HEALTH CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD MINNESOTA NORTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY YOUTH CONCEPTS ↗
  • Who funds CRISIS INTERVENTION & ADVOCACY CENTER ↗
  • Who funds CHILDREN AND FAMILY URBAN MINISTRIES D/B/A CHILDREN AND FAMILY URBAN MOVEMENT ↗

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.

Community Fdn of Greater Des Moines F/K/A Greater Des Moines Community FdnIA15× affinity5 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Fdn of Greater Des Moines F/K/A Greater Des Moines Community Fdn · Chrysalis Foundation · United Way of Central Iowa · Prairie Meadows Race Track and Casino Inc · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Planned Parenthood of the Heartland Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Planned Parenthood of the Heartland Inc. 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%19%38%56%75%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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    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 15 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 Planned Parenthood of the Heartland’s filings →

    More from the funding graph