· Public charity
Upper Mississippi Gaming Corp
Distribute conventure income to organizations
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 30 grants below total $604,040 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $636,616 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $32,576 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
- Under $10k10 grants · $74k
- $10k–50k18 grants · $370k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $160k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| GUTTENBERG ECONOMIC & INDUSTRIAL | $100,000 |
| GARNAVILLO FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION | $59,781 |
| GARNAVILLO LIONS CLUB | $36,300 |
| CITY OF MCGREGOR | $30,960 |
| ELGIN EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES | $27,041 |
| Individual grant recipient | $26,550 |
| CLAYTON COUNTY DEVELOPMENT GROUP | $26,000 |
| CITY OF MONONA | $25,000 |
| BERRY TENDER CHILDCARE | $25,000 |
| ST OLAF FIRE DEPARTMENT | $23,000 |
| LUANA VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT | $23,000 |
| NEICAC | $20,000 |
| CLAYTON COUNTY CONSERVATION | $20,000 |
| MAR-MAC UNIFIED POLICE DISTRICT | $15,104 |
| MCGREGOR HISTORICAL SOCIETY | $15,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $196k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 56% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +11% since the first grant, against -15% for the ones you funded once.
33 repeat relationships — 18 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 11 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 60% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $243k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- CCCLAYTON COUNTY DEVELOPMENT GROUP INC9× · 2017–2025 · $231k · revenue +35% · 26% of their budget
- MMMOTOR MILL FOUNDATION OF CLAYTON COUNTY4× · 2017–2024 · $218k · revenue +386% · 66% of their budget
- NINORTHEAST IOWA COMMUNITY ACTION CORP7× · 2017–2025 · $96k · revenue +11%
Funded once
- MBMONONA BUTTERFLY GARDENSone grant, 2023 · $100k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2024 · $75k
- PVPOINT VISIONone grant, 2024 · $50k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
Preservation of union county iowa hisorical information and artifacts.
Engage in, assist and contribute to the support of economical and industrial development of the city of graettinger, iowa, including the assistance, encouragement and preservation of existing businesses and industries
Industry development in County
To kindle and keep alive an active interest in state and local history through discovery and preservation of historical items of all types
Restoration and display of historical items pertinent to fremont county, iowa
To provide a county fair for rural iowa
To provide a 4-h county fair.
Commuity economic development and industrial development in adams county iowa.
Promotion of the community of eagle grov
Operation of the Iowa Aviation Museum
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Resource Conservation and Development for Northeast Iowa Inc and the most unlike its peers is Elgin Historical Society. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 15 years old; the field is 30. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 13% startups (under 5 years old) — 13% of your grantees by number, and just 7% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 5% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
25 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 25 of the 71 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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 CLAYTON COUNTY DEVELOPMENT GROUP INC ↗
- Who funds MOTOR MILL FOUNDATION OF CLAYTON COUNTY ↗
- Who funds VCTC Inc ↗
- Who funds Guttenberg Economic & Industrial Development Commi ↗
- Who funds NORTHEAST IOWA COMMUNITY ACTION CORP ↗
- Who funds CLAYTON COUNTY AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds BERRY TENDER CHILDCARE INC ↗
- Who funds POINT VISION ↗
- Who funds BACKBONE LAKE PROMOTION ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds MCGREGOR-MARQUETTE CENTER FOR THE ARTS INC ↗
- Who funds CENTRAL COMMUNITY HOSPITAL ↗
- Who funds NORTHEAST IOWA COUNCIL BOY SCOUTS ↗
- Who funds ELGIN EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds EDGEWOOD BOARD OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPM ↗
- Who funds CITY OF PRAIRIE DU CHIEN FIRE ASSOC INC ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Community Foundation of Greater Dubuque · Alliant Energy Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Upper Mississippi Gaming Corp 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Upper Mississippi Gaming Corp?
Find your warmest path to Upper Mississippi Gaming Corp 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.