Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

The Hormel Foundation

Is operated for the benefit of, and to assist in performing the functions and in carrying out the purpose of the Supported Organizations.

$37M
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$23M
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 FY20202025.

Education$135MCommunity Improvement$11MHuman Services$9.3MPublic Benefit$8.4MPhilanthropy$7.3MHealth$2.3M
02FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $714k
  • $250k+8 grants · $36M
$296,131
Median grant
1
States reached
$912M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
University of Minnesota-The Hormel Institute$22,611,300
Austin Community Charitable Fund$5,380,000
Riverland Community College$4,044,739
Austin Public Schools$1,486,193
United Way of Mower County$1,247,893
City of Austin$942,694
YMCA of Austin$296,131
The Salvation Army$290,000
Cedar Valley Services$236,336
Parenting Resource Center$225,000
Austin Community Growth Ventures$130,000
Mayo Clinic Health Systems-Austin campus$122,819
Austin Community Scholarship Committee$25,000
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:

Your human-services grants (FY20–25, $6.0M) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%Parenting Resource Center: $4.2M → 10%Parenting Resource Center: $1.0M → 10%Parenting Resource Center: $319k → 10%Parenting Resource Center: $225k → 10%Parenting Resource Center: $111k → 10%Parenting Resource Center: $37k → 10%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.

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.
$173M · 14 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

14 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
0

Total granted

$173M
$0

Still filing today

57%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
PhilanthropyHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementOther

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

  • UW
    UNITED WAY OF MOWER COUNTY INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $7.2M · revenue +9% · 85% of their budget
  • YM
    YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF AUSTIN MINNESOTA
    6× · 2020–2025 · $1.7M · revenue +23%
  • CV
    CEDAR VALLEY SERVICES INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $1.3M · revenue +76%

Funded once

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

    04Your field

    The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

    1
    Austin Community Education Fund

    Austin community education fund was created to provide scholarships to residents of austin, minnesota and the surrounding area through the austin area chamber of commerce.

    2
    Leadership Austin

    Leadership austin connects and develops leaders to courageously engage and transform our communities.

    Youth Development
    3
    Greater Austin Christian Foundation

    Mobilizing resources by inspiring biblical generosity in the greater austin, texas area.

    Religion
    4
    Austin Public Library Friends Foundation

    Support and strengthen austin public libraries

    Education
    5
    The Austin Area Commission for the Arts Inc

    Austin area arts applauds and advances all arts by welcoming diverse, creative individuals to share their unique talents to inspire our community.

    Philanthropy
    6
    African Development Center

    Grow businesses, build wealth and increase reinvestement in the african communities of minnesota

    Human Services
    7
    Austin Creative Reuse

    Fostering conservation and reuse through creativity, education, and community building.

    Human Services
    8
    Austin City Art Fund

    To support the production and exhibition of art and film

    Arts & Culture
    9
    Austin Community College Foundation

    Making education accessible for students through philanthropic support, aligned with Austin Community College (ACC) strategic priorities.

    Education
    10
    Austin Community Foundation Inc

    We mobilize ideas and resources to strengthen central texas.

    Philanthropy
    11
    Austin Area Chamber of Commerce

    To promote the economic, civil, industrial and cultural growth of austin, minnesota and the surrounding area.

    12
    Development Corporation of Austin

    To aggressively support new or existing industrial and other commercial enterprises for the economic betterment of austin and mower county.

    For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Austin Community Charitable Fund and the most unlike its peers is Austin Community Growth Ventures. 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 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. 8 of the 14 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.

    4
    Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
    2
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    8/8
    Grantees still filing
    5/8
    Grew since you first funded

    Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

    UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA — $112,326,629 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTAFOND DU LAC TRIBAL & COMMUNITY COLLEGE — $13,557,350 · OtherFOND DU LAC TRIBAL & COMMUNITY COLLEGEAUSTIN COMMUNITY CHARITABLE FUND — $10,064,016 · OtherAUSTIN COMMUNITY CHARITABLE FUNDAustin Public Schools — $9,337,533 · OtherAustin Public SchoolsCity of Austin — $8,375,612 · Other+5 more — $5,756,658 · OtherUNITED WAY OF MOWER COUNTY INC — $7,150,594 · Philanthropy+1 more — $122,646 · PhilanthropyPARENTING RESOURCE CENTER INC — $5,961,392 · Human ServicesAUSTIN COMMUNITY GROWTH VENTURES — $571,433 · Community Improvement
    Other$159,417,798Philanthropy$7,273,240Human Services$5,961,392Community Improvement$571,433

    Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

    25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetAUSTIN COMMUNITY CHARITABLE FUND — $10,064,016 over 6y, 99% of budgetUNITED WAY OF MOWER COUNTY INC — $7,150,594 over 6y, 85% of budgetPARENTING RESOURCE CENTER INC — $5,961,392 over 6y, 21% of budgetYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF AUSTIN MINNESOTA — $1,718,261 over 6y, 14% of budgetCEDAR VALLEY SERVICES INC — $1,337,831 over 6y, 1.6% of budgetAUSTIN COMMUNITY GROWTH VENTURES — $571,433 over 6y, 90% of budgetAUSTIN COMMUNITY SCHOLARSHIP COMMITTEE — $150,000 over 6y, 63% of budgetAUSTIN AREA FOUNDATION — $122,646 over 5y, 9.8% 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 AUSTIN COMMUNITY CHARITABLE FUND
    • Who funds UNITED WAY OF MOWER COUNTY INC
    • Who funds PARENTING RESOURCE CENTER INC
    • Who funds YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF AUSTIN MINNESOTA
    • Who funds CEDAR VALLEY SERVICES INC
    • Who funds AUSTIN COMMUNITY GROWTH VENTURES
    • Who funds AUSTIN COMMUNITY SCHOLARSHIP COMMITTEE
    • Who funds AUSTIN AREA FOUNDATION

    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 tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

    Mayo Clinic Group ReturnMN17.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: Mayo Clinic Group Return · Hormel Foods Corporation Charitable Trust · Southern Minnesota Initiative Foundation · United Way of Mower County Inc · C K Blandin Foundation · Amg Charitable Gift Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation

    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 The Hormel Foundation 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%6%25%56%100%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.

      05Through Plinth

      Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

      How do I get to The Hormel Foundation?

      Find your warmest path to The Hormel Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

      Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

      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 14 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