How much does The Lakota Fund Incorporated give?

The Lakota Fund Incorporated reported 10 itemized grants totaling $1,435,968, out of $1,666,436 in total grant expense reported on the return in its FY2025 IRS filing.

What does The Lakota Fund Incorporated fund?

By grant dollars over FY2024 to FY2025, its largest causes are Housing & Shelter (70%), Education (16%), Community Improvement (11%).

Who are The Lakota Fund Incorporated's largest grantees?

By total granted over FY2024 to FY2025: Great Plains Housing Initiative Inc ($801k), South Dakota Native Homeownership Coalition Inc ($780k), Crow Creek Housing Authority ($244k).

Which funders back the same organizations as The Lakota Fund Incorporated?

Its strongest co-funders, measured against what their size predicts, include South Dakota Community Foundation, First Nations Development Institute, Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund.

Where is The Lakota Fund Incorporated based?

The Lakota Fund Incorporated is based in SD.

The Lakota Fund Incorporated

The Lakota Fund Incorporated at a glance Mostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

The Lakota Fund Incorporated

Promote economic sustainability and break the cycle of poverty by providing native people with access to the capital and financial services healthy communities need to flourish.

$1.7M

Granted FY2025still arriving

Grants FY2025still arriving

States reached

$780k

Largest

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.

Housing & Shelter$2.1MEducation$483kCommunity Improvement$339kReligion$100k

02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured

The 10 grants below total $1,435,968, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,666,436 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $230,468 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–50k2 grants · $40k
$50k–250k7 grants · $616k
$250k+1 grant · $780k

$100,000

Median grant

States reached

$32M

Total assets

Largest grants
Recipient	Amount
SD NATIVE HOMEOWNERSHIP COALITION	$780,125
FOUR BAND COMMUNITY FUND INC	$139,000
YANKON SIOUX HOUSING AUTHORITY	$114,068
CROW CREEK HOUSING AUTHORITY	$100,000
SISSETON-WAHPETON HOUSING AUTHORITY	$100,000
WESTERN DAKOTA TECHNICAL COLLEGE	$62,917
TATANKA FUNDS	$50,000
SICANGU WICOTI AWANYAKAPI	$50,000
SINETE GLESKA UNIVERSITY	$24,026
SD SCHOOL OF MINES & TECH	$15,832

02The need

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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY24–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 26%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 98% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

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.

35%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.

$1.1M · 8 repeat orgs$2.0M to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$1.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+75%

Still filing today

25%

33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 38% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $894k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Community ImprovementHousing & 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

CC
CROW CREEK HOUSING AUTHORITY
2× · 2024–2025 · $244k
FB
FOUR BANDS COMMUNITY FUND INC
2× · 2024–2025 · $239k · revenue 0%
SH
SISSETON-WAHPETON HOUSING AUTHORITY
2× · 2024–2025 · $200k

Funded once

GP
GREAT PLAINS HOUSING INITIATIVE INC
one grant, 2024 · $801k
SB
SITTING BULL COLLEGE
one grant, 2024 · $84k · revenue +14%
SF
SIOUX FALLS SCHOOL DISTRICT #49-5
one grant, 2024 · $65k

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

04the grantee network

5 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. 5 of the 16 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.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

5/5

Grantees still filing

2/5

Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Other$1,140,572Community Improvement$1,119,125Housing & Shelter$800,791

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

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.

South Dakota Community FoundationSD19.5× affinity7 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: South Dakota Community Foundation · First Nations Development Institute · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 The Lakota Fund Incorporated funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Lakota Fund Incorporated. Bigger dots raise more.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24’25

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

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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to The Lakota Fund Incorporated?

Find your warmest path to The Lakota Fund Incorporated 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.

Play a game based on Lakota’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