Skip to content
Souris Valley United Way at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Souris Valley United Way

SOURIS VALLEY UNITED WAY mobilzes people, organizations and resources in an impactful effort to advance education, financial stability, and health while addressing basic human needs.

$316k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$91k
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 2025.

Human Services$1.5MHousing & Shelter$282kFood & Nutrition$261kPublic Safety & Disaster$50kYouth Development$18kRecreation & Sports$11kCrime & Legal$8k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 7 grants below total $302,409, the rows itemized in this filing. The $316,061 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $13,652 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k6 grants · $211k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $91k
$40,300
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NORTHERN PLAINS CHILD ADVOCACY$90,920
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CRISIS CENTER$48,770
MINOT COMMISSION ON AGING$47,179
MINOT AREA HOMELESS COALITION$40,300
MOUNTAIN PLAINS CHILD CARE$30,240
COMMUNITY ACTION$30,000
COMPANIONS FOR CHILDREN$15,000
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 (FY17–25, $594k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%MINOT AREA HOMELESS COALITION: $45k → 10%MINOT AREA HOMELESS COALITION: $40k → 10%FIRSTLINK: $6k → 12%FIRSTLINK: $5k → 12%MINOT AREA HOMELESS COALITION: $31k → 10%MINOT AREA HOMELESS COALITION: $31k → 10%MOUNTAIN PLAINS CHILD CARE: $30k → 10%COMMUNITY ACTION: $30k → 10%MINOT AREA HOMELESS COALITION: $30k → 10%MINOT AREA HOMELESS COALITION: $30k → 10%PROJECT BEE: $25k → 10%MINOT AREA HOMELESS COALITION: $25k → 10%MINOT AREA HOMELESS COALITION: $24k → 10%MOUNTAIN PLAINS CHILD CARE: $23k → 10%MINOT AREA HOMELESS COALITION: $22k → 10%COMMUNITY ACTION: $22k → 10%COMMUNITY ACTION: $20k → 10%COMMUNITY ACTION: $16k → 10%COMMUNITY ACTION: $13k → 10%COMMUNITY ACTION: $12k → 10%PROJECT BEE: $8k → 10%YWCA: $25k → 10%YWCA: $22k → 10%YWCA: $20k → 10%YWCA: $17k → 10%YWCA: $15k → 10%YWCA: $10k → 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.
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.
$2.1M · 18 repeat orgs$41k to everyone else

18 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
3

Total granted

$2.1M
$41k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+62%
+78%

Still filing today

78%
67%

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 ServicesFood & NutritionYouth DevelopmentHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • MA
    MINOT AREA HOMELESS COALITION
    9× · 2017–2025 · $277k · revenue +143%
  • MC
    MINOT COMMISSION ON AGING INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $261k · revenue +50%
  • PB
    PROJECT BEE
    8× · 2017–2024 · $142k · revenue +295%

Funded once

  • ME
    Mid-Dakota Education
    one grant, 2017 · $28k
  • LS
    LEGAL SERVICES OF NORTH DAKOTAgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $8k · revenue +78%
  • MA
    MINOT AREA MEN'S WINTER REFUGE
    one grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue -21%
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
Northwest Counseling Service Inc

Housing Counseling Services

Housing & Shelter
2
Southeastern North Dakota Community Action Agency

Southeastern north dakota community action agency (sendcaa) was formed in 1965 to provide a range of services and activities in a six county area designed to alleviate poverty and give low-income people the opportunity to improve their…

Human Services
3
Catholic Charities of the Diocese of St Cloud

At Catholic Charities, we focus our efforts around three core pillars: Food Access, Mental Health and Housing. Guided by our mission - to serve and enhance human dignity for all people - we provide essential services and foster a sense of…

Human Services
4
Minnesota Valley Action Council Inc

Develop resources and opportunities which empower people and communities.

Community Improvement
5
Citizen Dispute Resolution Services Inc

Resolve disputes through mediation.

Crime & Legal
6
Minot Social Club for Exceptional Persons Inc

To enhance the quality of life for adults with developmental disabilities by providing social, educational, and recreational activities.

Human Services
7
Western South Dakota Senior Services Inc

To assist seniors in maintaining optimal health, independence, and socialization, deferring admission to long term care facilities and improving their quality of life.

—
8
FamilyWise Services

Strengthening families by promoting the safety, stability and wellbeing of children.

Health
9
Carbon County Counseling Center

To provide professional counseling services related primarily to mental health and substance abuse to the residents of Carbon County, Wyoming.

—
10
United Way of North Central Iowa

Seeking to build a stronger, more caring community by forming partnerships with businesses, community experts, education & health & human service agencies to achieve targeted outcomes & sustained changes in community conditions which will…

Philanthropy
11
Duluth Cross Country Ski Club

Promote health through skiing

Recreation & Sports
12
Minnesota River Area Agency on Aging Inc

MNRAAA helps older adults thrive in Southwest MN by enabling older adults to maintain the lifestyle of their choice. MNRAAA strives to ensure that services are available for older adults and caregivers, by providing information and…

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Community Action Partnership - Minot Region; the most unlike its peers is Bottineau Winter Park 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

16 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 16 of the 21 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
9
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
11/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CRISIS CENTER: $409,945 · Human ServicesDOMESTIC VIOLENCE CRISIS CENTERMINOT AREA HOMELESS COALITION: $276,955 · Human ServicesMINOT AREA HOMELESS COALITIONPROJECT BEE: $141,657 · Human ServicesPROJECT BEECOMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP - MINOT REGION: $112,283 · Human ServicesCOMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP - MINOT REGIONMOUNTAIN PLAINS YOUTH WORKS: $52,740 · Human Services+1 more: $10,846 · Human ServicesUniversity of North Dakota-College of Business & Public Admin: $343,139 · OtherUniversity of North Dakota-College of Bu…SALVATION ARMY: $110,000 · OtherSALVATION ARMYCatholic Charities North Dakota: $53,124 · OtherCatholic Charities North DakotaVillage Family Service Center: $50,160 · OtherVillage Family Service CenterAMERICAN RED CROSS: $49,533 · OtherAMERICAN RED CROSSLUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF ND: $32,798 · OtherYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF MINOT: $29,595 · OtherMid-Dakota Education: $27,820 · Other+4 more: $50,185 · Other+4 moreMINOT COMMISSION ON AGING INC: $260,655 · Food & NutritionMINOT COMMISSI…COMPANIONS FOR CHILDREN: $84,650 · Youth DevelopmentMINOT AREA MEN'S WINTER REFUGE: $5,000 · Housing & Shelter
Human Services$1,004,426Other$746,354Food & Nutrition$260,655Youth Development$84,650Housing & Shelter$5,000

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 budgetDOMESTIC VIOLENCE CRISIS CENTER: $409,945 over 9y, 4.2% of budgetMINOT AREA HOMELESS COALITION: $276,955 over 9y, 16% of budgetMINOT COMMISSION ON AGING INC: $260,655 over 9y, 1.2% of budgetPROJECT BEE: $141,657 over 8y, 6.1% of budgetCOMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP - MINOT REGION: $112,283 over 6y, 1.2% of budgetCOMPANIONS FOR CHILDREN: $84,650 over 9y, 7.0% of budgetCatholic Charities North Dakota: $53,124 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetMOUNTAIN PLAINS YOUTH WORKS: $52,740 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetVillage Family Service Center: $50,160 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetLUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF ND: $32,798 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF MINOT: $29,595 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetNORTHERN LIGHTS COUNCIL OF THE BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA INC: $18,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetFIRSTLINK: $10,846 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetLEGAL SERVICES OF NORTH DAKOTA: $8,000 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 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CRISIS CENTER ↗
  • Who funds MINOT AREA HOMELESS COALITION ↗
  • Who funds MINOT COMMISSION ON AGING INC ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT BEE ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP - MINOT REGION ↗
  • Who funds COMPANIONS FOR CHILDREN ↗
  • Who funds Catholic Charities North Dakota ↗
  • Who funds MOUNTAIN PLAINS YOUTH WORKS ↗
  • Who funds Village Family Service Center ↗
  • Who funds LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF ND ↗
  • Who funds YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF MINOT ↗
  • Who funds NORTHERN LIGHTS COUNCIL OF THE BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA INC ↗
  • Who funds BOTTINEAU WINTER PARK INC ↗
  • Who funds FIRSTLINK ↗
  • Who funds LEGAL SERVICES OF NORTH DAKOTA ↗
  • Who funds MINOT AREA MEN'S WINTER REFUGE ↗

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.

Ichf FoundationOtto Bremer TrustInspiritus Community …Blue Cross Blue Shiel…North Dakota Communit…Midcontinent Foundati…United Way of Cass-Cl…Minot Community Found…Missouri Slope Areawi…Impact FoundationThe Barry FoundationXcel Energy Foundation
Ichf FoundationND32.6× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ichf Foundation · Otto Bremer Trust · Inspiritus Community Health Foundation · Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Dakota Caring Foundation · North Dakota Community Foundation · Midcontinent Foundation · United Way of Cass-Clay · Minot Community Foundation · Missouri Slope Areawide United Way · Impact Foundation · The Barry Foundation · Xcel Energy 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 Souris Valley United Way funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Souris Valley United Way. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's 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
    7report 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, 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 21 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 Souris Valley United Way’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