Loading…
Loading…
South Dakota · Nonprofit
PICKEREL LAKE CONSERVANCY (South Dakota) is funded by 3 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $163,050 in grants to it, the largest being Severson Family Foundation ($117,200). 1 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
PICKEREL LAKE CONSERVANCY runs a healthier operating margin than three-quarters of the 4,072 environment nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 4,072 environment nonprofits $100k–$1M, FY2024
Revenue, expenses and net assets — each indexed to 100 at its first filing year, so you read the trajectory, not the magnitude. The shaded band is where the middle 50% of its peers' revenue would sit, given their growth.
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 0 of the last 4 reported years ran a deficit.
The base broadened — 1 funders to 2 as grant income moved $1k → $38k.
2 of 3 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 28% of grant dollars received. That money is really individual donors directing a sponsor; the institutions to cultivate are the non-DAF funders.
From the IRS filings of PICKEREL LAKE CONSERVANCY’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
PICKEREL LAKE CONSERVANCY leans on a few funders — its largest provides 72% of grant income and the top three 100%; half comes from just 1 funder.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 1 funder to its left
Largest funder’s share by year: 2017 100% · 2018 100% · 2019 100% · 2020 100% · 2023 100% · 2024 52% · 2025 92% — diversifying over time.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
PICKEREL LAKE CONSERVANCY draws 100% of its grant income from funders outside South Dakota — its reputation reaches beyond the state, across 3 states in all.
In-state vs out-of-state, by year
Grantmakers that don’t fund you yet, surfaced two ways: they back organizations that share your funders, or their grantees resemble your mission. The ones both signals agree on come first.
From the co-funder graph (funders backing at least two comparable organizations, shrunk for grantee count, donor-advised and mega-funds excluded) and the universe embeddings. A research starting point; overlap is association, not a guarantee of fit.
Nonprofits whose mission and program text most resemble this one, by semantic similarity over the universe of US filings — the closest peers, and often the clearest route to shared or prospective funders.
Read directly from this organization’s own Form 990, as neutral context.
97%
Share of support from the public (Schedule A) — the basis for its public-charity status.
Operates in 1 state
Every figure is read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML — this organization’s own return for FY2024 (financials across 2021–2024), and the filings of 3funders that report grants to it. “On record” means captured in the filings we have parsed — a funder that does not e-file, or whose grant detail is not itemized, will not appear. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind. view filing