Skip to content
United Way of Clinton County Iowa at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

United Way of Clinton County Iowa

To provide leadership in our communities to 1) identify our most pressing human care needs, 2) to work together to direct the time, energy and resources towards addressing those needs to improve our quality of life.

$170k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$40k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Human Services$709kPublic Safety & Disaster$420kHealth$321kRecreation & Sports$289kEmployment$189kFood & Nutrition$156kEducation$128kYouth Development$87kOther$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 8 grants below total $161,690, the rows itemized in this filing. The $169,690 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $8,000 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

  • Under $10k1 grant · $9k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $153k
$15,900
Median grant
1
States reached
$347k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
INFORMATION REFERRAL & ASSIS$39,750
YWCA OF CLINTON$38,000
CLINTON COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT$26,000
ASAC DBA NEW DIRECTIONS$15,900
SKYLINE CENTER$12,000
FAMILY RESOURCES INC$11,040
CLINTON COUNTY SPECIAL ATHLET$10,000
WOMEN'S HEALTH SERVICES$9,000
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 (FY17–25, $597k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $13k → 11%CONCERNED DEWITT CITIZENS: $17k → 13%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $8k → 11%CONCERNED DEWITT CITIZENS: $17k → 13%CONCERNED DEWITT CITIZENS: $14k → 13%CONCERNED DEWITT CITIZENS: $14k → 13%DEWITT REFERRAL CENTER: $12k → 13%DEWITT REFERRAL CENTER: $12k → 13%DEWITT REFERRAL CENTER: $6k → 13%YWCA OF CLINTON: $79k → 13%YWCA OF CLINTON: $76k → 13%YWCA OF CLINTON: $66k → 13%YWCA OF CLINTON: $65k → 13%YMCA OF CLINTON: $59k → 13%YWCA OF CLINTON: $48k → 13%YWCA OF CLINTON: $48k → 13%YWCA OF CLINTON: $38k → 13%GATEWAY IMPACT COALITION: $7k → 13%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.
$2.4M · 18 repeat orgs$16k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +11% since the first grant, against -50% for those funded once.

18 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
2

Total granted

$2.4M
$16k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+11%
-50%

Still filing today

61%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

50%100%’17’18’19’20’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHealthRecreation & SportsEmploymentYouth DevelopmentCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • YO
    YWCA OF CLINTON IOWA
    8× · 2017–2025 · $477k · revenue +169%
  • RC
    RIVER CITIES INFORMATION
    8× · 2017–2025 · $400k · revenue +449% · 30% of their budget
  • SC
    SKYLINE CENTER INC
    8× · 2017–2025 · $221k · revenue +11%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $10k
  • IC
    ILLOWA COUNCIL INC BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA
    one grant, 2017 · $6k · revenue -50%
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
United Way of Clinton County Iowa

To provide leadership in our communities to 1) identify our most pressing human care needs, 2) to work together to direct the time, energy and resources towards addressing those needs to improve our quality of life.

—
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
United Way of North Central Iowa

Seeking to build a stronger, more caring community by forming partnerships with businesses, community experts, education & health & human service agencies to achieve targeted outcomes & sustained changes in community conditions which will…

Philanthropy
4
Iowa Association of Community

Relentlessly advocating for providers to build healthy communities.

—
5
Northeast Iowa Community Action Corp

Through dynamic partnerships, quality family services, advocacy and education, neicac advances community development and improves social and economic conditions for individuals and families with limited resources.

Human Services
6
Iowa Laborers' Employers Cooperation & Education Trust

Improve communications between employers and local unions.

—
7
Mid-Iowa Community Action Inc

Mica helps families experencing poverty meet their needs, build on their strengths, and achieve their goals.

Community Improvement
8
Independent Insurance Agents of Iowa

The independent insurance agents of iowa will be an unrelenting advocate of the business, professional and political interests of its members; doing so by working in the public's interest and with the highest ethical standards.

—
9
Food Bank of Iowa

The organization receives, warehouses, and distributes salvageable food items to non-profit tax exempt member agencies to feed the ill, needy, and infants.

Food & Nutrition
10
Aging Resources of Central Iowa

The mission of aging resources of central iowa is to lead, advocate, and serve; as well as plan and coordinate resources in the provision of services to older persons in central iowa, their families, caregivers, or representatives,…

Human Services
11
Webster City Day Care

Child day care center

—
12
Iowa Association of Community Action Directors

To assist in the provision of a better life for iowa's low-income residents, through assistance to the community action organization located within the state.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Illowa Council Inc Boy Scouts of America; the most unlike its peers is Chickasaw Athletic Booster Club. 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

14 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. 14 of the 20 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/14
Grantees still filing
7/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

RIVER CITIES INFORMATION: $399,550 · OtherRIVER CITIES INFORMATIONASSOCIATE BENEVOLENT SOCIETY: $155,550 · OtherASSOCIATE BENEVOLENT SOCIETYFAMILY RESOURCES INC: $107,306 · OtherFAMILY RESOURCES INCDEWITT AREA FOUNDATION: $84,470 · OtherDEWITT AREA FOUNDATIONMENTOR CLINTON COUNTY FORMERLY BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS: $81,634 · OtherMENTOR CLINTON COUNTY FORMERLY BIG BROTHERS B…CLINTON COUNTY SPECIAL ATHLETES: $51,500 · OtherCITY OF CLINTON REC DEPARTMENT: $42,500 · OtherGATEWAY IMPACT COALITION: $41,000 · Other+2 more: $24,908 · OtherYWCA OF CLINTON IOWA: $477,418 · Human ServicesYWCA OF CLINTON IOWACONCERNED DEWITT CITIZENS LTD: $99,150 · Human ServicesCONCERNED DEWITT CITIZENS L…American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $20,538 · Human ServicesAREA SUBSTANCE ABUSE COUNCIL INC: $190,302 · HealthAREA SUBSTANCE…WOMENS HLTH SERV OF EASTERN IA INC: $130,532 · HealthWOMENS HLTH SE…SKYLINE CENTER INC: $220,509 · EmploymentSKYLINE CE…CHICKASAW ATHLETIC BOOSTER CLUB: $176,724 · Recreation & SportsCHICKASAW…CAMANCHE CHILDHOOD DEV BD INC: $18,333 · Recreation & SportsCAMANCHE …UNITED WAYS OF IOWA: $113,800 · Community ImprovementILLOWA COUNCIL INC BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA: $5,760 · Youth Development
Other$988,418Human Services$597,106Health$320,834Employment$220,509Recreation & Sports$195,057Community Improvement$113,800Youth Development$5,760

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetYWCA OF CLINTON IOWA: $477,418 over 8y, 3.7% of budgetRIVER CITIES INFORMATION: $399,550 over 8y, 30% of budgetSKYLINE CENTER INC: $220,509 over 8y, 0.6% of budgetAREA SUBSTANCE ABUSE COUNCIL INC: $190,302 over 8y, 0.3% of budgetCHICKASAW ATHLETIC BOOSTER CLUB: $176,724 over 4y, 83% of budgetASSOCIATE BENEVOLENT SOCIETY: $155,550 over 4y, 44% of budgetWOMENS HLTH SERV OF EASTERN IA INC: $130,532 over 8y, 4.0% of budgetUNITED WAYS OF IOWA: $113,800 over 4y, 2.1% of budgetFAMILY RESOURCES INC: $107,306 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetCONCERNED DEWITT CITIZENS LTD: $99,150 over 7y, 11% of budgetMENTOR CLINTON COUNTY FORMERLY BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS: $81,634 over 4y, 32% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $20,538 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCAMANCHE CHILDHOOD DEV BD INC: $18,333 over 2y, 3.2% of budgetILLOWA COUNCIL INC BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA: $5,760 over 1y, 0.3% 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.

  • Who funds YWCA OF CLINTON IOWA ↗
  • Who funds RIVER CITIES INFORMATION ↗
  • Who funds SKYLINE CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds AREA SUBSTANCE ABUSE COUNCIL INC ↗
  • Who funds CHICKASAW ATHLETIC BOOSTER CLUB ↗
  • Who funds ASSOCIATE BENEVOLENT SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds WOMENS HLTH SERV OF EASTERN IA INC ↗
  • Who funds UNITED WAYS OF IOWA ↗
  • Who funds FAMILY RESOURCES INC ↗
  • Who funds CONCERNED DEWITT CITIZENS LTD ↗
  • Who funds MENTOR CLINTON COUNTY FORMERLY BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS ↗
  • Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
  • Who funds CAMANCHE CHILDHOOD DEV BD INC ↗
  • Who funds ILLOWA COUNCIL INC BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA ↗

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.

Allison Everett Pears…Community Foundation …Amazonsmile Foundation
Allison Everett Pearson FoundationIA15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Allison Everett Pearson Foundation · Community Foundation of Greater Dubuque · 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 Way of Clinton County Iowa funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from United Way of Clinton County Iowa. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 20 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 Way of Clinton County Iowa’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