Skip to content
Rural Community Assistance Partnership Incorporated at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Rural Community Assistance Partnership Incorporated

Rcap works with rural communities across the country to elevate rural voices and build local capacity to improve quality of life, starting at the tap.

$30M
Granted FY2025still arriving
16
Grants FY2025still arriving
12
States reached
$5.6M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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.

Community Improvement$93MPublic Benefit$24MHousing & Shelter$22MEducation$3.1MHuman Services$2.1MEnvironment$1.5MEmployment$732kPhilanthropy$20kOther$0
02FY2025 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $29k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $510k
  • $250k+9 grants · $30M
$332,611
Median grant
12
States reached
$7.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
RURAL COMM ASSISTANCE CORP$5,593,553
MIDWEST ASSISTANCE PARTNERSHIP$4,654,816
RCAP SOLUTIONS INC$4,636,182
COMMUNITIES UNLIMITED$4,440,970
GLCAP$4,355,173
SERCAP$4,171,589
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS$1,074,985
INTER TRIBAL COUNCIL OF ARIZONA INC$332,611
MOONSHOT MISSIONS$289,317
CEC (COMMUNITY ENGINEERING CORPS)$150,273
UCLA$124,365
NADO (NAT'L ASSN OF DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS)$67,271
NATIONAL ENIVORMENTAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION$57,721
AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOCIATION$55,775
NATIONAL GROUND WATER ASSOCIATION$54,107
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 (FY17–25, $24.6M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%GLCAP: $4.4M → 12%GLCAP: $3.3M → 12%GLCAP: $3.1M → 12%GLCAP: $3.0M → 12%GLCAP: $2.6M → 12%GREAT LAKES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $2.6M → 12%GREAT LAKES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $2.1M → 12%WSOS COMMUNITY ACTION COMMISSION: $1.8M → 12%GREAT LAKES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $1.7M → 12%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

VT
IL
MA
OR
OH
PA
RI
CA
CO
MO
KY
VA
AZ
AR
TN
DC
MS
TX
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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$176M · 29 repeat orgs$517k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +56% since the first grant, against +33% for those funded once.

29 repeat relationships: 14 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

29
5

Total granted

$176M
$77k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+56%
+33%

Still filing today

72%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $440k 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
Community ImprovementEnvironmentPublic BenefitHuman ServicesInternationalSocial ScienceOther
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

  • CU
    COMMUNITIES UNLIMITED INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $30M · revenue +116% · 42% of their budget
  • RC
    Rural Community Assistance Corporation
    9× · 2017–2025 · $30M · revenue +380%
  • RS
    RCAP SOLUTIONS INC FORMERLY RURAL HOUSING IMPROVEMENT INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $27M · revenue +149%

Funded once

  • WILLAMETTE PARTNERSHIPgraduated
    one grant, 2024 · $27k · revenue +33%
  • CA
    COMMUNITY ACTION KENTUCKY INC
    one grant, 2024 · $15k · revenue -1%
  • VT
    VIRGINIA TECH
    one grant, 2019 · $13k
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
National Association of Clean Water Agencies

Nacwa is the national voice of public clean water utilities, shaping water policy, convening a vibrant peer network, and empowering water leaders.

—
2
National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners

Founded in 1889, the national association of regulatory utility commisioners (naruc) is a non-profit organization dedicated to representing the state public service commisions who regulate the utilities that provide essential services such…

—
3
American Gas Association

American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…

—
4
Rural Water Association of Utah

Technical assistance for water and waste water systems

Public Benefit
5
National Rural Water Association

To cultivate opportunities for state associations to be successful for the benefits of their memebers.

—
6
Association of State Drinking Water Administrators

Asdwa seeks to protect the public health by working with both state and federal officials to assure the highest quality drinking water possible.

Environment
7
WateReuse Association

The mission of WateReuse is to educate the public on the importance of reusing water and to advocate for laws, policies and funding to increase water reuse in communities across the United States.

—
8
Western Resource Advocates

Western Resource Advocates (WRA) is a regional nonprofit advocacy organization fighting climate change and its impacts to sustain the environment, economy, and people of the West. As the region's go-to experts for more than three decades,…

Crime & Legal
9
National Hydropower Association Inc

Champion water power as america's premier emission-free renewable energy resource. inform public policy to protect, enhance and expand water power within the u.s. electric system. share technological advancement and encourage operational…

—
10
Waterways Council Inc

The mission of the corporation is to be the national unifying association of america's numerous inland waterways and ports infrastructure interests, serving as the definitive spokesperson for inland waterways infrastructure in washington…

Environment
11
Association of Washington Cities

The association of washington cities builds connections between our state's diverse cities and towns, while providing our members with the support needed to thrive through delivery of data-driven education, nationally recognized pooling…

—
12
America's Watershed Initiative

America's watershed initiative serves as a trusted voice that brings partners together and champions sound science to secure a future in which the rivers and people of the mississippi river watershed thrive.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Midwest Assistance Program Inc; the most unlike its peers is International Association of Administrative Professionals. 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

25 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. 25 of the 36 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
25/25
Grantees still filing
21/25
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

RCAP SOLUTIONS INC FORMERLY RURAL HOUSING IMPROVEMENT INC: $26,571,651 · OtherRCAP SOLUTIONS INC FORMERLY RURAL HOUSIN…MIDWEST ASSISTANCE PROGRAM INC: $26,164,132 · OtherMIDWEST ASSISTANCE PROGRAM INCTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS: $5,815,918 · OtherTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY …+19 more: $4,806,387 · Other+19 moreCOMMUNITIES UNLIMITED INC: $29,941,736 · Community ImprovementCOMMUNITIES UNLIMITED INCRural Community Assistance Corporation: $29,774,945 · Community ImprovementRural Community Assistance Corporation+3 more: $162,635 · Community ImprovementSOUTHEAST RURAL COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE PROJECT INC: $25,736,218 · Public BenefitSOUTHEAST RURAL CO…AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOCIATION: $2,718,192 · Public BenefitAMERICAN WATER WOR…GREAT LAKES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $24,605,119 · Human ServicesGREAT LAKES COM…Moonshot Missions Inc: $289,317 · EnvironmentMULTIPLIER: $59,450 · EnvironmentWater Environment Federation: $58,095 · EnvironmentWILLAMETTE PARTNERSHIP: $27,200 · EnvironmentENGINEERS WITHOUT BORDERS-USAINC: $150,273 · InternationalTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC: $15,000 · Social Science
Other$63,358,088Community Improvement$59,879,316Public Benefit$28,454,410Human Services$24,605,119Environment$434,062International$150,273Social Science$15,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCOMMUNITIES UNLIMITED INC: $29,941,736 over 9y, 42% of budgetRural Community Assistance Corporation: $29,774,945 over 9y, 12% of budgetRCAP SOLUTIONS INC FORMERLY RURAL HOUSING IMPROVEMENT INC: $26,571,651 over 9y, 8.2% of budgetMIDWEST ASSISTANCE PROGRAM INC: $26,164,132 over 9y, 66% of budgetSOUTHEAST RURAL COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE PROJECT INC: $25,736,218 over 9y, 46% of budgetGREAT LAKES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $24,605,119 over 9y, 7.0% of budgetAMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOCIATION: $2,718,192 over 9y, 1.4% of budgetWATER SYSTEMS COUNCIL: $1,398,338 over 8y, 30% of budgetINTER TRIBAL COUNCIL OF ARIZONA INC: $1,169,212 over 9y, 0.7% of budgetNATIONAL GROUND WATER ASSOCIATION INC: $541,733 over 9y, 2.0% of budgetNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION: $401,656 over 8y, 1.1% of budgetNATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES: $270,262 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetNational Onsite Wastewater Recycling Association: $161,782 over 3y, 7.3% of budgetENGINEERS WITHOUT BORDERS-USAINC: $150,273 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetNational Association of Development Organizations Research Foundation: $108,494 over 3y, 4.0% of budgetMULTIPLIER: $59,450 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWater Environment Federation: $58,095 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetMOUNTAIN ASSOCIATION FOR COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INC: $39,141 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetRURAL DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES INC: $35,811 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetWILLAMETTE PARTNERSHIP: $27,200 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetINTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROFESSIONALS: $15,925 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetCOMMUNITY ACTION KENTUCKY INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC: $15,000 over 2y, 0.0% 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 COMMUNITIES UNLIMITED INC ↗
  • Who funds Rural Community Assistance Corporation ↗
  • Who funds RCAP SOLUTIONS INC FORMERLY RURAL HOUSING IMPROVEMENT INC ↗
  • Who funds MIDWEST ASSISTANCE PROGRAM INC ↗
  • Who funds SOUTHEAST RURAL COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds GREAT LAKES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds WATER SYSTEMS COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds INTER TRIBAL COUNCIL OF ARIZONA INC ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL GROUND WATER ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds Moonshot Missions Inc ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES ↗
  • Who funds National Onsite Wastewater Recycling Association ↗
  • Who funds ENGINEERS WITHOUT BORDERS-USAINC ↗
  • Who funds UNITED SOUTH AND EASTERN TRIBESINC ↗
  • Who funds National Association of Development Organizations Research Foundation ↗
  • Who funds MULTIPLIER ↗
  • Who funds Water Environment Federation ↗
  • Who funds MOUNTAIN ASSOCIATION FOR COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INC ↗
  • Who funds RURAL DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES INC ↗
  • Who funds WILLAMETTE PARTNERSHIP ↗
  • Who funds INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROFESSIONALS ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY ACTION KENTUCKY INC ↗
  • Who funds THE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC ↗

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.

Local Initiatives Sup…Amazonsmile Foundation
Local Initiatives Support CorporationNY9× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Local Initiatives Support Corporation · 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 Rural Community Assistance Partnership Incorporated funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Rural Community Assistance Partnership Incorporated. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 11%
  • Willamette Partnership: 76% of income from government
  • Rural Development Initiatives Inc: 11% of income from government
  • Rcap Solutions Inc Formerly Rural Housing Improvement Inc: 3% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely 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 36 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 Rural Community Assistance Partnership’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