Skip to content
Southeast Kansas Coordinated Transit Council Inc at a glance

· Public charity

Southeast Kansas Coordinated Transit Council Inc

To coordinate transportation services for the public

$2.3M
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$1.1M
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, FY2024 to 2025.

Health$2.8MCommunity Improvement$1.0MHuman Services$299kEmployment$117k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $50k–250k5 grants · $672k
  • $250k+2 grants · $1.6M
$181,599
Median grant
1
States reached
$153k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FOUR COUNTY MENTAL HEALTH$1,081,006
SEK-CAP INC$540,491
COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER OF$225,029
ALLEN REGIONAL TRANSIT$181,599
CLASS LTD$132,163
TRI-VALLEY DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES$76,460
ELK COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING$56,637
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 (FY25–25, $182k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 16%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 16%ALLEN REGIONAL TRANSIT: $182k → 16%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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.9M · 6 repeat orgs$332k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +5% since the first grant, against -26% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
1

Total granted

$3.9M
$151k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+5%
-26%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $182k went to new ones.

50%100%’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’24’25
HealthCommunity ImprovementEmploymentHuman ServicesOther
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

  • FC
    FOUR COUNTY MENTAL HEALTH CENTER INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $2.0M · revenue +17%
  • SK
    SOUTHEAST KANSAS COMMUNITY ACTION P
    2× · 2024–2025 · $1.0M · revenue +20%
  • CL
    CLASS LTD
    2× · 2024–2025 · $273k · revenue +3%

Funded once

  • TA
    THRIVE ALLEN COUNTY INC
    one grant, 2024 · $151k · revenue -26%
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
Jefferson County Service Organization Inc

Provide transportation, commodities, information and outreach to over 700 jefferson county, kansas residents.

—
2
North Central Kansas Housing Opportunities Inc
Community Improvement
3
Flint Hills Area Transportation Agency

The mission of Flint Hills Area Transportation Agency (the Organization) is to provide and promote the highest quality transit services to the Flint Hills communities.

—
4
Mental Health Center of East Central Kansas

To provide dynamic, culturally-sensitive, high quality behavioral healthcare to residents of chase, coffey, greenwood, lyon, morris, osage and wabaunsee counties in the most effective, caring and efficient manner.

Health
5
East Topeka Council on Aging Inc

The purpose of the East Topeka Council on Aging, Inc. is to assist older persons of Shawnee County in achieiving the optimum level of functioning.

Human Services
6
Clay County Task Force Inc

Providing low-cost public transportation for all in clay county and providing services to meet the needs of the seniors in our community.

Human Services
7
Stoddard County Transit Services Inc

Provide transportation to handicapped individuals and senior citizens.

—
8
River Bend Transit

The agency provides transportation services for the elderly, disabled, and general public.

Public Benefit
9
Tri-Valley Transit Inc

To enhance the economic, social and environmental health of the communities we serve by providing public transportation services for everyone that are safe, reliable, accessible and affordable.

Human Services
10
Konza Prairie Community Health Center Inc

Provide physician, dental and related healthcare services through clinics located in geary and riley county, kansas.

Health
11
Community Clinic of Southwest Missouri

The mission of the community clinic of southwest missouri is to improve the health of people in our community without access to medical, dental, or mental health care.

—
12
Scott County Transit System Inc

Public transportation

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Four County Mental Health Center Inc; the most unlike its peers is Allen Regional Transit 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

8 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
4/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FOUR COUNTY MENTAL HEALTH CENTER INC: $2,012,127 · HealthFOUR COUNTY MENTAL HEALTH CENTER INCCOMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER OF SE KANSAS INC: $376,149 · HealthCOMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER OF SE KANSAS INCTHRIVE ALLEN COUNTY INC: $150,600 · HealthTHRIVE ALLEN COUNTY INCSOUTHEAST KANSAS COMMUNITY ACTION P: $1,025,448 · Community ImprovementSOUTHEAST KANSAS COMMUNITY …CLASS LTD: $273,061 · OtherCLASS LTDELK COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING INC: $117,461 · OtherELK COUNTY…ALLEN REGIONAL TRANSIT INC: $181,599 · Human ServicesTRI-VALLEY DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES INC: $116,602 · Employment
Health$2,538,876Community Improvement$1,025,448Other$390,522Human Services$181,599Employment$116,602

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 budgetFOUR COUNTY MENTAL HEALTH CENTER INC: $2,012,127 over 2y, 3.6% of budgetSOUTHEAST KANSAS COMMUNITY ACTION P: $1,025,448 over 2y, 3.5% of budgetCOMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER OF SE KANSAS INC: $376,149 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCLASS LTD: $273,061 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetALLEN REGIONAL TRANSIT INC: $181,599 over 1y, 21% of budgetTHRIVE ALLEN COUNTY INC: $150,600 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetELK COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING INC: $117,461 over 2y, 41% of budgetTRI-VALLEY DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES INC: $116,602 over 2y, 0.8% 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.

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.

Sunflower Foundation …Community Foundation …Amazonsmile Foundation
Sunflower Foundation Health Care for KansansKS15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sunflower Foundation Health Care for Kansans · Community Foundation of Southeast Kansas · 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 Southeast Kansas Coordinated Transit Council Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Southeast Kansas Coordinated Transit Council Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%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
    4report 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 8 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 Southeast Kansas Coordinated Transit Council’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