· Private foundation
Amato Family Foundation Inc
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k21 grants · $23k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $50k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Journey 21 | $22,000 |
| Saint Joseph Peruvian Mission Fund | $17,500 |
| MATC Foundation | $10,000 |
| Summit 54 | $5,000 |
| WATDA Foundation | $5,000 |
| Oconomowoc Area Foundation | $5,000 |
| Create Wisconsin | $2,500 |
| The Shelter for Abused Women Childr | $1,200 |
| Impact 100 Milwaukee | $1,100 |
| St John Vianney Church | $460 |
| Kettle Moraine Garden Club | $405 |
| Individual grant recipient | $350 |
| Basilica of St Josaphat | $300 |
| Ronald McDonald House | $250 |
| Leukemia Lymphoma Society | $200 |
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 (FY18–24, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 95% 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
24 repeat relationships — 14 still active in FY2024, 10 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
- SJST JOSEPH'S PERUVIAN MISSION5× · 2017–2021 · $75k · revenue +17%
- OLOKAUCHEE LAKE SAILING SCHOOL INC4× · 2017–2021 · $26k · revenue +847%
- TFTHE FOUNDATION OF THE WISCONSIN AUTOMOBILE & TRUCK DEALERS ASSOCIATION4× · 2021–2024 · $20k · revenue +26%
Funded once
- MAMilwaukee Area Technical College Foone grant, 2019 · $20k
- NJNATIVITY JESUIT ACADEMY INCone grant, 2021 · $5k
- SCSt Catherine of Alexandra Parishone grant, 2017 · $5k
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.
We conduct impartial public policy research and analysis to drive informed debate and effective decision-making in the state of wisconsin.
The mission of the uwm foundation, inc. is to support the educational, literary, and scientific endeavors of the university of wisconsin-milwaukee by receiving, managing, and distributing gifts to benefit the university's students,…
Support research and innovation at the university of wisconsin - milwaukee by providing reserach funding, entrepreneurship support, and by engaging in corporate partnering activities to that end.
Milwaukee women inc is an organization of executives determined to change the quality and composition of corporate boards to maximize the performance of public and private companies with a focus on women and women of color.
The uw-green bay foundation furthers the mission of uw-green bay, a public university, by developing and increasing opportunities for students primarily in the areas other than those in which the state of wisconsin ordinarily makes…
The wisconsin technical college system (wtcs) foundation, inc., seeks to advance the wisconsin technical college system, its constituent technical colleges and public and private sector career, technical and workplace education. the…
The medical college of wisconsin (mcw) is a distinguished leader and innovator in the education and development of the next generation of physicians, (continued in schedule o)
To partner with the public and private sectors to develop and hold real estate for the benefit of the university of wisconsin-milwaukee. the uwm real estate foundation, inc. holdings may include any properties that advance the mission of…
Support, promote, and facilitate partnerships with and provide funding for innovative early-stage and startup companies to lessen the burdens of government by promoting economic development and creating sustaining jobs in wisconsin.
Founded in 1911, our mission is to make wisconsin the most competitive state in the nation to do business. we are wisconsin's business voice.
To cultivate civil discourse, increase understanding, and create common ground by connecting wisconsin people and ideas.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Make-a-Wish Foundation of Wisconsin Inc and the most unlike its peers is Marquette University. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 43 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 17% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 8% 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.
32 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. 32 of the 81 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 ST JOSEPH'S PERUVIAN MISSION ↗
- Who funds MILWAUKEE AREA TECHNICAL COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Journey 21 Inc ↗
- Who funds OKAUCHEE LAKE SAILING SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds WAUKESHA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE FOUNDATION OF THE WISCONSIN AUTOMOBILE & TRUCK DEALERS ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds OCONOMOWOC AREA FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SUMMIT54 ↗
- Who funds CREATE WISCONSIN INC ↗
- Who funds KETTLE MORAINE GARDEN CLUB INC ↗
- Who funds PATHFINDERS MILWAUKEE INC ↗
- Who funds WOMEN FOR MACC INC ↗
- Who funds HOPE THROUGH RESTORATION INC ↗
- Who funds American Heart Association Inc ↗
- Who funds WOMEN AND GIRLS FUND OF WAUKESHA COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds FOOD PANTRY OF WAUKESHA COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds STARS AND STRIPES HONOR FLIGHT 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: Baird Foundation Inc · Greater Milwaukee Foundation Inc · United Way of Greater Milwaukee & Waukesha County Inc · Ge Aerospace Foundation · Herbert H Kohl Charities Inc · Emil Ewald Family Foundation Inc · The Independent Charitable Gift Fund · Green Bay Packers Foundation · The Galaxy Foundation Inc · Ellenbecker Investment Group Charitable Foundation Inc · Windhover Foundation Inc · Waukesha County Community 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 Amato Family Foundation 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.
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.