· Private foundation
Annmarie Foundation Inc
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
Read this first · the figures below need context
98% of Annmarie Foundation Inc’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Eau Claire Community Foundation, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 19 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2024, the last year Annmarie Foundation Inc named its own grantees at scale: 31 organizations, $463k. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2021–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k166 grants · $403k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $60k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| PHILLIPS SCHOOL DISTRICT | $15,430 |
| EAU CLAIRE SCHOOL DISTRICT | $13,520 |
| REGIS CATHOLIC SCHOOLS | $10,434 |
| EAU CLAIRE SCHOOL DISTRICT | $10,312 |
| PHILLIPS YOUTH BASEBALL | $10,000 |
| MEDFORD SCHOOL DISTRICT | $9,565 |
| PHILLIPS SCHOOL DISTRICT | $9,152 |
| PABLO CENTER AT THE CONFLUENCE | $9,094 |
| RIVER FALLS SCHOOL DISTRICT | $8,500 |
| CHIPPEWA FALLS SCHOOL DISTRICT (CHIPPEWA FALLS AREA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT | $8,000 |
| REGIS CATHOLIC SCHOOLS | $7,893 |
| NEW RICHMOND SCHOOL DISTRICT | $7,105 |
| EAU CLAIRE SCHOOL DISTRICT | $6,805 |
| MEDFORD SCHOOL DISTRICT | $6,714 |
| GLENWOOD CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT | $6,549 |
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 (FY21–24, $6k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 41% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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.
77 repeat relationships — 55 still active in FY2024, 22 since wound down; 97 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call). Read against FY2024, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
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, 77% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $40k 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
- CCCONFLUENCE COUNCIL INC3× · 2021–2024 · $22k · revenue +63%
- HGHOPE GOSPEL MISSION INC3× · 2021–2025 · $6k · revenue +12%
- ECEAU CLAIRE ASSOCIATION OF MUSEUMS INC3× · 2021–2024 · $5k · revenue +8%
Funded once
- ECEAU CLAIRE CITY-COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENTone grant, 2022 · $8k
- ESELLSWORTH SCHOOL DISTRICTone grant, 2021 · $6k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2022 · $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.
Provide educational child care services to children ages one month through seventeen years of age in our rual community.
We believe that all children are special & unique. Our goal is to create a safe, loving environment where children can learn & be nurtured. We offer children 6 wks to 10 yrs a program emphasizing a child's total development: physical,…
Rainbow Childcare Inc. is a not for profit child care agency committed to providing quality, affordable, learning-oriented child care to the greater Green County community. We serve the children enrolled at Rainbow Childcare, Inc. and…
Our goal is to have a significant and positive influence on each child in our care.
Childcare
Coulee childrens center, a provider of childcare services proudly empowers and strengthen families by focusing on healthy development and school readiness
Musical arts programs for Eagle River, Wisconsin
Providing day care services to mitchell county, iowa, and the surrounding area. 50 to 70 children are serviced on a daily basis.
Provide a well rounded, affordable and dependable daycare facility for parents with children growing up in a rural north iowa area.
To provide shelter to the homeless community in merrill wi
Hope house of st. croix valley provides people experiencing life-changing health challenges access to compassionate care that respects their dignity and choices.
Our pursuit is to emphasize equality, solidarity, emotional literacy, and exploration of the arts within our classrooms and surrounding community. It is our goal to build on a child's academic foundation with play based learning, hands-on…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Bridge to Hope and the most unlike its peers is Colafax Railroad Museum Inc. 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 21 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 17% startups (under 5 years old) — 8% 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.
52 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. 52 of the 307 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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.
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: Green Bay Packers Foundation · Xcel Energy Foundation · Mayo Clinic Group Return · Pablo Foundation Inc · Otto Bremer Trust · Rcu Foundation Inc · Eau Claire Community Foundation · Hugh J Andersen Foundation · St Croix Valley Foundation · The Nordson Corporation Foundation · Andersen Corporate Foundation · United Way of the Greater Chippewa Valley Inc
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 Annmarie 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Annmarie Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Annmarie Foundation Inc 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.