Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Southeastern Conference

To promote and administer intercollegiate athletic competition among its sixteen member non-profit institutions of higher education located in the southeastern united states and assist member institutions in the maintenance of programs of intercollegiate athletics which are compatible with the highest standards of education and…

$8.6M
Granted FY2025still arriving
16
Grants FY2025still arriving
12
States reached
$556k
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.

Recreation & Sports$67MPublic Safety & Disaster$2.7MHealth$100k
02FY2025 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 16 grants below total $7,829,591 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $8,595,474 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $765,883 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $50k–250k2 grants · $271k
  • $250k+14 grants · $7.6M
$540,094
Median grant
12
States reached
$351M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA$556,147
UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE$548,260
UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA$547,131
UNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPI$544,551
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA$543,379
MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY$542,634
UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI$540,690
UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY$540,094
AUBURN UNIVERSITY$539,931
UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA$536,713
UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS$535,313
LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY$534,155
TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY$534,109
VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY$515,512
UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA$135,486
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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA: $585k → 16%UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS: $569k → 14%AUBURN UNIVERSITY: $651k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA: $588k → 17%UNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPI: $578k → 18%MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY: $614k → 24%LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY: $671k → 19%UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA: $584k → 16%UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS: $569k → 14%AUBURN UNIVERSITY: $644k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA: $581k → 17%UNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPI: $578k → 18%MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY: $585k → 24%LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY: $576k → 19%UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA: $572k → 16%UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS: $564k → 14%AUBURN UNIVERSITY: $583k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA: $579k → 17%UNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPI: $565k → 18%MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY: $582k → 24%LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY: $576k → 19%UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA: $562k → 16%UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS: $558k → 14%AUBURN UNIVERSITY: $574k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA: $576k → 17%UNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPI: $558k → 18%MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY: $577k → 24%LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY: $564k → 19%UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA: $560k → 16%UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS: $547k → 14%AUBURN UNIVERSITY: $566k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA: $562k → 17%UNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPI: $557k → 18%MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY: $568k → 24%LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY: $561k → 19%UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA: $557k → 16%UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS: $545k → 14%AUBURN UNIVERSITY: $553k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA: $557k → 17%UNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPI: $554k → 18%MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY: $565k → 24%LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY: $552k → 19%UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA: $545k → 16%UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA: $549k → 17%UNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPI: $545k → 18%MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY: $549k → 24%UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA: $543k → 16%UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA: $547k → 17%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.

Which US states your grants reach

MO
KY
AR
TN
SC
OK
LA
MS
AL
GA
TX
FL

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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$69M · 16 repeat orgs$300k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +74% since the first grant, against +6% for the ones you funded once.

16 repeat relationships — 16 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
3

Total granted

$69M
$300k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+74%
+6%

Still filing today

19%
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
EducationRecreation & SportsScience & TechOther

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

  • UA
    UNIVERSITY ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $5.1M · revenue +55%
  • UO
    University of Georgia Athletic Assn Inc
    9× · 2017–2025 · $4.9M · revenue +91%
  • Vanderbilt University
    9× · 2017–2025 · $4.8M · revenue +74%

Funded once

  • University of South Carolina Educational Foundation
    one grant, 2017 · $100k · revenue -11%
  • LF
    LSU FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $100k · revenue +103%
  • TM
    The Mike Slive Foundation for Prostate Cancer Research
    one grant, 2018 · $100k · revenue +6%

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

04Your field
04the grantee network

6 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. 6 of the 19 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/6
Grantees still filing
5/6
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

AUBURN UNIVERSITY — $5,062,603 · OtherAUBURN UNIVERSITYMISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY — $5,017,338 · OtherMISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITYLOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY — $4,999,122 · OtherLOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITYTEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY — $4,982,418 · OtherTEXAS A&M UNIVERSITYBOARD OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA — $4,977,037 · OtherBOARD OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMAUSC School of Medicine Greenville — $4,940,983 · OtherUSC School of Medicine GreenvilleTHE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE — $4,918,651 · OtherTHE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEEUNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPI — $4,901,334 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPIUNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY ATHLETICS — $4,881,706 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY ATHLETICSUNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS FAYETTEVILLE — $4,848,416 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS FAYETTEVILLECURATORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI — $4,816,195 · OtherCURATORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI+2 more — $290,972 · OtherUniversity of Georgia Athletic Assn Inc — $4,933,013 · EducationUniversity of Ge…Vanderbilt University — $4,768,171 · EducationVanderbilt Unive…+2 more — $200,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION INC — $5,075,317 · Recreation & SportsThe Mike Slive Foundation for Prostate Cancer Research — $100,000 · Science & Tech
Other$54,636,775Education$9,901,184Recreation & Sports$5,075,317Science & Tech$100,000

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 budgetUNIVERSITY ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION INC — $5,075,317 over 9y, 0.5% of budgetUniversity of Georgia Athletic Assn Inc — $4,933,013 over 9y, 0.4% of budgetVanderbilt University — $4,768,171 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of South Carolina Educational Foundation — $100,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLSU FOUNDATION — $100,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetThe Mike Slive Foundation for Prostate Cancer Research — $100,000 over 1y, 18% 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.

  • Who funds UNIVERSITY ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION INC
  • Who funds University of Georgia Athletic Assn Inc
  • Who funds Vanderbilt University
  • Who funds University of South Carolina Educational Foundation
  • Who funds LSU FOUNDATION
  • Who funds The Mike Slive Foundation for Prostate Cancer Research

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.

National Collegiate Athletic AssociationIN13.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Collegiate Athletic Association

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 Southeastern Conference 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%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%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 · 0–15%
    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 19 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