Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

West Central Minnesota Communities Action Inc

Empowering people while providing services and resources that impact individuals and communities.

$2.9M
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$93k
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 FY20222025.

Housing & Shelter$922kCommunity Improvement$153kReligion$93kHuman Services$40kEmployment$11k
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 9 grants below total $246,255 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $2,860,788 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $2,614,533 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 $10k2 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $140k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $93k
$17,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$6.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNITED STATES CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIC BISHOPS$93,197
MINNESOTA VALLEY ACTION COUNCIL$40,000
LAKES AND PRAIRIES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP$34,058
NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT ALLIANCE INC$24,000
TRI-COUNTY ACTION PROGRAM INC$17,000
THREE RIVERS COMMUNITY ACTION INC$14,000
EMERGE$11,000
COMMUNITY ACTION DULUTH$7,000
MN8$6,000
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 (FY24–25, $64k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 89% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%ANOKA COUNTY COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM INC: $7k → 7%TRI-COUNTY ACTION PROGRAM INC: $17k → 11%LAKES AND PRAIRIES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $34k → 11%MN8: $6k → 14%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.

85%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.0M · 4 repeat orgs$182k to everyone else

4 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
1

Total granted

$1.0M
$7k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
0%

Still filing today

75%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 29% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $175k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
Human 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

  • MH
    Minnesota Housing Finance Agency
    3× · 2022–2024 · $922k
  • MV
    MINNESOTA VALLEY ACTION COUNCIL INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $50k · revenue +5%
  • ND
    NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT ALLIANCE INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $40k · revenue -41%

Funded once

  • AC
    ANOKA COUNTY COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM INC
    one grant, 2024 · $7k · revenue 0%

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
Eastern Nebraska Community Action Partnership

Encap provides high-impact programs to help people get ahead.

2
Tri-County Community Action Partnership Inc

To engage the entire community to listen to and partner with low-income individuals and families to expand their opportunities to move out of economic poverty and toward prosperity.

3
African Development Center

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

Human Services
4
Wright County Community Action Inc

Working in partnership with the community to empower residents to improve their physical, social and economic well-being. we work to alleviate the causes and conditions of poverty.

Human Services
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
Minnesota Community Action Partnership

To strengthen the capacity of its member agencies to achieve their poverty-fighting missions, through influential advocacy, collaboration, and training.

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
Community Action Partnership of Ramsey and Washington Counties

Invest in people experiencing poverty to build general prosperity.

9
Muskegon-Oceana Community Action Partnership Inc

Through dedicated staff and community partnerships we provide services, resources, education and advocacy to improve the quality of life for all residents of muskegon and oceana counties.

10
St Paul Transportation Management Organization

Move minnesota leads the movement for an equitable and sustainable transportation system that puts people first. we are passionate about connecting communities, ending the climate crisis, expanding access to jobs and resources, and…

Environment
11
Mid Michigan Community Action Agency Inc

Mid michigan community action guides local residents on the path to self-sufficiency through empowerment, education and community enrichment.

12
Community Action Board

To partner with the community to eliminate poverty and create social change through advocacy and essential services.

Employment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Three Rivers Community Action Inc and the most unlike its peers is Neighborhood Development Alliance 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

9 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. 9 of the 11 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
3/9
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Minnesota Housing Finance Agency — $921,507 · OtherMinnesota Housing Finance AgencyUNITED STATES CATHOLIC CONFERENCE — $93,197 · OtherUNITED STATES CATHOLIC CONFERENCE+3 more — $50,000 · OtherMINNESOTA VALLEY ACTION COUNCIL INC — $50,000 · Community ImprovementNEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT ALLIANCE INC — $40,000 · Community ImprovementLAKES AND PRAIRIES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC — $34,058 · Human ServicesTRI-COUNTY ACTION PROGRAM INC — $17,000 · Human ServicesANOKA COUNTY COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM INC — $7,000 · Human ServicesMN8 — $6,000 · Human Services
Other$1,064,704Community Improvement$90,000Human Services$64,058

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetMINNESOTA VALLEY ACTION COUNCIL INC — $50,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetNEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT ALLIANCE INC — $40,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetLAKES AND PRAIRIES COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC — $34,058 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCOMMUNITY ACTION DULUTH INC — $25,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetTRI-COUNTY ACTION PROGRAM INC — $17,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHREE RIVERS COMMUNITY ACTION INC — $14,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetANOKA COUNTY COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM INC — $7,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

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.

Otto Bremer TrustMN17.2× affinity6 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Otto Bremer Trust · Saint Paul & Minnesota Foundation · Greater Green Bay Community Foundation 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 West Central Minnesota Communities Action Inc 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%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    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.

    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 11 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