Skip to content
United Community Action Partnership Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

United Community Action Partnership Inc

The mission of united community action partnership, inc.

$8.2M
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$572k
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, FY2018 to 2025.

Health$2.4MHuman Services$921kCommunity Improvement$406kCivil Rights$164kCrime & Legal$127kHousing & Shelter$113k
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 8 grants below total $915,853, the rows itemized in this filing. The $8,161,782 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $7,245,929 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–50k3 grants · $73k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $271k
  • $250k+1 grant · $572k
$53,486
Median grant
1
States reached
$27M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PRAIRIE FIVE COMMUNITY ACTION COUNCIL INC$572,256
SOUTHWEST CRISIS CENTER$88,369
WOMEN'S RURAL ADVOCACY PROGRAM INC$78,326
LAKES & PRAIRIES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP$53,486
WEST CENTRAL MINNESOTA COMMUNITIES ACTION INC$50,899
MAHUBE-OTWA COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC$44,487
MARSHALL PUBLIC SCHOOLS ADULT BASIC EDUCATION$17,370
WRIGHT COUNTY COMMUNITY ACTION INC$10,660
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 (FY18–25, $645k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 98% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%WRIGHT COUNTY COMMUNITY ACTION INC: $11k → 5%WOMEN'S RURAL ADVOCACY PROGRAM INC: $78k → 11%LAKES & PRAIRIES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $72k → 11%WOMENS RURAL ADVOCACY PROGRAM: $57k → 11%LAKES & PRAIRIES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $61k → 11%WOMENS RURAL ADVOCACY PROGRAM: $57k → 11%LAKES & PRAIRIES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $59k → 11%LAKES & PRAIRIES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $53k → 11%WOMENS RURAL ADVOCACY PROGRAM: $13k → 11%LAKES & PRAIRIES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $52k → 11%LAKES & PRAIRIES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $49k → 11%LAKES & PRAIRIES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $43k → 11%LAKES & PRAIRIES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $40k → 11%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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$4.1M · 8 repeat orgs$45k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
1

Total granted

$4.1M
$17k

Still filing today

88%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $28k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesCommunity ImprovementCivil RightsOther
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

  • PF
    Prairie Five Community Action Council Inc
    8× · 2018–2025 · $2.4M · revenue +35%
  • LA
    LAKES AND PRAIRIES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC
    8× · 2018–2025 · $429k · revenue +104%
  • MC
    MAHUBE-OTWA COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC
    8× · 2018–2025 · $386k · revenue +35%

Funded once

  • SA
    SALVATION ARMY
    one grant, 2018 · $17k
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 Community Action Inc

Our mission is to stimulate a focusing of all available resources upon the goal of enabling area low-income families and individuals of all ages to attain skills, knowledge, and motivations, and secure the opportunities needed for them to…

Human Services
2
West Central Community Action

In partnership with state and federal government, our mission is to administer programs designed to help residents in our 10-county region of southwest iowa achieve self-sufficiency.

Human Services
3
Community Action of Southeast Iowa

The organization is dedicated to alleviating the conditions and causes of poverty by building partnerships and strengthening people through quality services. community action of southeast iowa administers programs funded or supported by…

—
4
Minnesota Acts Now

Crime and communities violence interve

Crime & Legal
5
Care in Action Minnesota

Our mission is to enhance the quality of life of children who have experienced abuse or neglect, strengthen families and prevent childhood maltreatment, by providing timely crucial support that meets the basic needs of local families and…

Human Services
6
West Central Missouri Community Action Agency

West central helps people and communities reach their fullest potential by cultivating and coordinating resources, building partnerships, and advocating for change.

—
7
Kootasca Community Action Inc

The mission of KOOTASCA Community Action, Inc. is "Building Community to End Poverty." This is done by helping low income people build assets, providing high quality early childhood education, and engaging the community through…

—
8
South Central Iowa Community Action Program

To address the causes and conditions of poverty through community engagement, economic support, education and cognitive development, family support, health and welfare, housing stabilization, any other activities which secure opportunities…

Community Improvement
9
North Central Community Action Program Inc

The mission of NCCAP is to act as an advocate, provider, and facilitator of programs and services for low-income individuals in Lincoln, Marathon, and Wood Counties (WI). NCCAP seeks to create opportunities for people and communities to…

Community Improvement
10
Southwestern Wisconsin Community Action Program Inc

We work to mitigate the causes and conditions of poverty in southwestern wisconsin, building resilience and self-sufficiency by providing supportive services and programs, and by collaborating with partners.

Human Services
11
Community Action Partnership

Community action partnership provides a range of services, which enable, educate, and assist with self sufficiency, to individuals and communites in western north dakota.

Human Services
12
Mid-Columbia Community Action Council

To alleviate the causes and conditions of poverty in Wasco, Hood River, and Sherman Counties. The purpose of MCCAC shall be the promotion of self sufficiency in families and individuals within the low income economic ranges in the three…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mahube-Otwa Community Action Partnership Inc; the most unlike its peers is Prairie Five Community Action Council 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. 8 of the 11 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
7/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Prairie Five Community Action Council Inc: $2,439,025 · OtherPrairie Five Community Action Council IncMAHUBE-OTWA COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC: $385,512 · OtherMAHUBE-OTWA COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INCWEST CENTRAL COMMUNITIES ACTION INC: $248,391 · OtherWEST CENTRAL COMMUNITIES ACTION INC+2 more: $34,483 · OtherLAKES AND PRAIRIES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC: $428,788 · Human ServicesLAKES AND PRAIRIE…WOMENS RURAL ADVOCACY PROGRAMS: $205,225 · Human ServicesWOMENS RURAL ADVO…+1 more: $10,660 · Human ServicesWEST CENTRAL MINNESOTA COMMUNITIES ACTION INC: $157,704 · Community ImprovementSouthwestern MN Opportunity Council: $57,076 · Community ImprovementSOUTHWEST CRISIS CENTER: $163,696 · Civil Rights
Other$3,107,411Human Services$644,673Community Improvement$214,780Civil Rights$163,696

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPrairie Five Community Action Council Inc: $2,439,025 over 8y, 3.6% of budgetLAKES AND PRAIRIES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC: $428,788 over 8y, 0.9% of budgetMAHUBE-OTWA COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC: $385,512 over 8y, 0.4% of budgetWOMENS RURAL ADVOCACY PROGRAMS: $205,225 over 4y, 6.7% of budgetSOUTHWEST CRISIS CENTER: $163,696 over 3y, 5.1% of budgetWEST CENTRAL MINNESOTA COMMUNITIES ACTION INC: $157,704 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetSouthwestern MN Opportunity Council: $57,076 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetWRIGHT COUNTY COMMUNITY ACTION INC: $10,660 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

Initiative FoundationOtto Bremer TrustAmazonsmile Foundation
Initiative FoundationMN15.2× affinity5 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Initiative Foundation · Otto Bremer Trust · 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 United Community Action Partnership Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from United Community Action Partnership Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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 11 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 United Community Action Partnership’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