Skip to content
Charles & Marcia Larsenanthony & Priscilla Beadell Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Charles & Marcia Larsenanthony & Priscilla Beadell Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$107k
Granted FY2024still arriving
58
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$33k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Arts & Culture$450kEducation$165kHuman Services$56kEnvironment$32kReligion$29kHealth$27kHousing & Shelter$11kYouth Development$11kOther$0
02FY2024 · 58 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k55 grants · $54k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $53k
$500
Median grant
4
States reached
$2.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MILWAUKEE PUBLIC MUSEUM$33,000
LAWRENCE UNIVERSITY$10,000
PENINSUAL MUSIC FESTIVAL$10,000
DOOR COMMUNITY AUDITORIUM$5,000
MILWAUKEE PUBLIC MUSEUM$5,000
MILWAUKEE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA$3,000
PENINSULA PLAYERS$2,500
BIRCH CREEK MUSIC PERFORM$2,500
DOOR COUNTY LAND TRUST$2,000
EPHRAIM MORAVIAN CHURCH$2,000
Individual grant recipient$1,200
HELP OF DOOR COUNTY INC$1,125
BIRCH CREEK MUSIC PERFORM$1,000
EPHRAIM MORAVIAN CHURCH$1,000
MILWAUKEE RESCUE MISSION$1,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY17–24, $35k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 69% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%NORTHERN DOOR CHILD CARE: $2k → 8%NORTHERN DOOR CHILD CARE: $1k → 8%SHARP LITERACY INC: $1k → 17%SHARP LITERACY INC: $500 → 17%NORTHERN DOOR CHILD CARE: $1k → 8%SHARP LITERACY INC: $500 → 17%NORTHERN DOOR CHILD CARE: $1k → 8%SHARP LITERACY INC: $500 → 17%SHARP LITERACY INC: $500 → 17%NORTHERN DOOR CHILD CARE: $1k → 8%SHARP LITERACY INC: $500 → 17%SHARP LITERACY INC: $500 → 17%SHARP LITERACY INC: $500 → 17%SHARP LITERACY INC: $500 → 17%NORTHERN DOOR CHILD CARE: $1k → 8%NORTHERN DOOR CHILD CARE: $1k → 8%NORTHERN DOOR CHILDRENS CENTER: $1k → 8%NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE: $500 → 17%NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE: $500 → 17%NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE: $500 → 17%NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE: $500 → 17%NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE: $500 → 17%NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE: $500 → 17%NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE: $500 → 17%NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE: $500 → 17%NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE: $500 → 17%INDEPENDENCE FIRST: $500 → 17%INDEPENDENCE FIRST: $500 → 17%INDEPENDENCE FIRST INC: $500 → 17%INDEPENDENCE FIRST: $500 → 17%INDEPENDENCE FIRST: $500 → 17%INDEPENDENCE FIRST: $500 → 17%INDEPENDENCE FIRST: $500 → 17%INDEPENDENCE FIRST: $500 → 17%SECURE FUTURES: $1k → 17%SECURE FUTURES: $1k → 17%SECURE FUTURES: $1k → 17%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF WI: $1k → 17%SECURE FUTURES: $1k → 17%SECURE FUTURES: $1k → 17%SECURE FUTURES: $1k → 17%SECURE FUTURES: $1k → 17%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF WI: $500 → 17%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF WI: $500 → 17%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF WI: $500 → 17%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF WI: $500 → 17%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF WI: $500 → 17%SUNSHINE HOUSE: $500 → 8%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$760k · 53 repeat orgs$39k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +38% since the first grant, against +16% for those funded once.

53 repeat relationships: 40 still active in FY2024, 13 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

53
21

Total granted

$760k
$37k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+38%
+16%

Still filing today

49%
29%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Arts & CultureHuman ServicesEducationHealthEnvironmentAnimalsOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • MILWAUKEE PUBLIC MUSEUM INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $206k · revenue +20%
  • PENINSULA MUSIC FESTIVAL INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $62k · revenue +38%
  • DC
    DOOR COMMUNITY AUDITORIUM CORP
    8× · 2017–2024 · $29k · revenue +101%

Funded once

  • LC
    LAWRENCE CENTER ACADEMIC SUCCESS
    one grant, 2020 · $25k
  • UM
    UNITED METHODIST CHURCH
    one grant, 2017 · $5k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2019 · $1k
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Museum of Wisconsin Art Inc

The museum of wisconsin art celebrates the value, diversity, and uniqueness of the visual arts and artists of wisconsin. this is achieved by collecting, conserving, documenting, exhibiting, and promoting aesthetic understanding of the…

Arts & Culture
2
Wisconsin Maritime Museum Inc

The wisconsin maritime museum connects all people with wisconsin's waterways, by engaging and educating the public about wisconsin's maritime history, wisconsin's world war ii submarines, uss cobia, and the great lakes. the wisconsin…

Arts & Culture
3
Wisconsin Chamber Orchestra Inc

Strengthen communities by providing high-quality and innovative artistic experiences that entertain, inspire, and unite diverse audiences.

Arts & Culture
4
Wisconsin Conservatory of Music Inc

Inspiring individuals and communities through exceptional music education, accessible to all.

Arts & Culture
5
Midwest Dairy Association

Midwest dairy works with others to give consumers an excellent dairy experience increasing sales, fostering innovation, and inspiring consumer confidence of dairy products and practices.

—
6
Radio Milwaukee Inc

To reach a new generation of radio listeners on air, online and in the community with a compelling selection of music and public affairs programming. the corporation celebrates milwaukee music, arts, heritage, and culture by supporting and…

Arts & Culture
7
Wisconsin Academy of Sciences Arts and Letters

To cultivate civil discourse, increase understanding, and create common ground by connecting wisconsin people and ideas.

Arts & Culture
8
Minnesota Orchestral Association

The minnesota orchestra mission is to enrich, inspire and serve our community as an enduring symphony orchestra internationally recognized for its artistic excellence.

Arts & Culture
9
Milwaukee Institute of Art & Design Inc

The milwaukee institute of art and design's mission is to ignite curious minds through art, design and service. we value courage to seek our own path, integrity to pursue our lives and work with meaning, kindness to thoughtfully engage…

—
10
Wisconsin Policy Forum Inc

We conduct impartial public policy research and analysis to drive informed debate and effective decision-making in the state of wisconsin.

Public Benefit
11
Lawrence University of Wisconsin

Lawrence university of wisconsin, through its undergraduate residential college and conservatory of music, educates students in the liberal arts and sciences. the university is devoted to excellence and integrity in all of its activities…

Education
12
Milwaukee Public Theatre Inc

Making the arts accessible to all

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Milwaukee Art Museum Inc; the most unlike its peers is American Lung Association. 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

34 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 34 of the 77 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
12
Early backer (in before they grew)
34/34
Grantees still filing
25/34
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MILWAUKEE PUBLIC MUSEUM INC: $205,500 · Arts & CultureMILWAUKEE PUBLIC MUSEUM INCMILWAUKEE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA INC: $63,200 · Arts & CultureMILWAUKEE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA INCPENINSULA MUSIC FESTIVAL INC: $61,668 · Arts & CulturePENINSULA MUSIC FESTIVAL INCLyric Opera of Chicago: $13,000 · Arts & Culture+10 more: $31,300 · Arts & Culture+10 moreLAWRENCE UNIVERSITY: $106,000 · OtherLAWRENCE UNIVERSITYPENINSULA PLAYERS: $25,000 · OtherPENINSULA PLAYERSLAWRENCE CENTER ACADEMIC SUCCESS: $25,000 · OtherLAWRENCE CENTER ACADEMIC SUCCESSEPHRAIM MORAVIAN CHURCH: $19,650 · OtherEPHRAIM MORAVIAN CHURCHIndividual grant recipient: $18,250 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCAMP MANITO-WISH YMCA INC: $11,000 · OtherBIRCH CREEK MUSIC PERFORM: $10,500 · OtherMILWAUKEE RESCUE MISSION: $10,500 · Other+39 more: $87,525 · Other+39 moreNORTHERN DOOR CHILDRENS CENTER INC: $8,500 · Human ServicesSECUREFUTURES FOUNDATION INC: $7,000 · Human ServicesSHARP LITERACY INC: $5,000 · Human ServicesNEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE INC: $4,500 · Human ServicesINDEPENDENCE FIRST INC: $4,000 · Human ServicesINTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF WISCONSIN INC: $3,500 · Human ServicesSUNSHINE HOUSE INC: $2,500 · Human ServicesDOOR COMMUNITY AUDITORIUM CORP: $29,000 · EducationEPHRAIM MENS CLUB: $3,900 · Education+2 more: $1,500 · EducationDOOR COUNTY LAND TRUST INC: $26,200 · EnvironmentHELP OF DOOR COUNTY INC: $10,125 · HealthAMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION: $500 · Health+1 more: $200 · HealthPROJECT KINDRED INC: $4,500 · Youth Development
Arts & Culture$374,668Other$313,425Human Services$35,000Education$34,400Environment$26,200Health$10,825Youth Development$4,500

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMILWAUKEE PUBLIC MUSEUM INC: $205,500 over 8y, 0.4% of budgetMILWAUKEE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA INC: $63,200 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetPENINSULA MUSIC FESTIVAL INC: $61,668 over 8y, 2.1% of budgetDOOR COMMUNITY AUDITORIUM CORP: $29,000 over 8y, 0.8% of budgetDOOR COUNTY LAND TRUST INC: $26,200 over 8y, 0.4% of budgetLyric Opera of Chicago: $13,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetCAMP MANITO-WISH YMCA INC: $11,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetHELP OF DOOR COUNTY INC: $10,125 over 8y, 0.6% of budgetNORTHERN DOOR CHILDRENS CENTER INC: $8,500 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetNORTHERN SKY THEATER INC: $7,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetSECUREFUTURES FOUNDATION INC: $7,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetMILWAUKEE ART MUSEUM INC: $6,200 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetDOOR SHAKESPEARE INC: $5,000 over 5y, 0.7% of budgetSHARP LITERACY INC: $5,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetNEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE INC: $4,500 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetPROJECT KINDRED INC: $4,500 over 7y, 0.5% of budgetPENINSULA SCHOOL OF ART INC: $4,300 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetMIDSUMMER'S MUSIC LTD: $4,000 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetINDEPENDENCE FIRST INC: $4,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetEPHRAIM MENS CLUB: $3,900 over 8y, 1.1% of budgetINTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF WISCONSIN INC: $3,500 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetTHE RIDGES SANCTUARY INC: $3,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetSUNSHINE HOUSE INC: $2,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetUNITED PERFORMING ARTS FUND INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEPHRAIM FIRE - RESCUE ASSOCIATION: $2,000 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetBERGSTROM-MAHLER MUSEUM INC: $1,800 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetMALAIKA EARLY LEARNING CENTER: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOLIN AND FRIENDS CONCERTS INC: $500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetAMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPAPERWEIGHT COLLECTORS ASSOCIATION INC: $400 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetScleroderma Research Foundation: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJunior League of Milwaukee: $150 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds MILWAUKEE PUBLIC MUSEUM INC ↗
  • Who funds MILWAUKEE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA INC ↗
  • Who funds PENINSULA MUSIC FESTIVAL INC ↗
  • Who funds DOOR COMMUNITY AUDITORIUM CORP ↗
  • Who funds DOOR COUNTY LAND TRUST INC ↗
  • Who funds Lyric Opera of Chicago ↗
  • Who funds CAMP MANITO-WISH YMCA INC ↗
  • Who funds HELP OF DOOR COUNTY INC ↗
  • Who funds NORTHERN DOOR CHILDRENS CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds NORTHERN SKY THEATER INC ↗
  • Who funds SECUREFUTURES FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds MILWAUKEE ART MUSEUM INC ↗
  • Who funds DOOR SHAKESPEARE INC ↗
  • Who funds SHARP LITERACY INC ↗
  • Who funds NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE INC ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT KINDRED INC ↗
  • Who funds PENINSULA SCHOOL OF ART INC ↗
  • Who funds MIDSUMMER'S MUSIC LTD ↗
  • Who funds INDEPENDENCE FIRST INC ↗
  • Who funds EPHRAIM MENS CLUB ↗
  • Who funds INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF WISCONSIN INC ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Greater Milwaukee Fou…Ellsworth and Carla P…Green Bay Packers Fou…Door County Community…Mmg Foundation IncGreater Green Bay Com…Herbert H Kohl Charit…United Way of Greater…Baird Foundation IncTatman FoundationWisconsin Public Serv…Milwaukee Jewish Fede…
Greater Milwaukee Foundation IncWI34.6× affinity15 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Greater Milwaukee Foundation Inc · Ellsworth and Carla Peterson Charitable Foundation · Green Bay Packers Foundation · Door County Community Foundation Inc · Mmg Foundation Inc · Greater Green Bay Community Foundation Inc · Herbert H Kohl Charities Inc · United Way of Greater Milwaukee & Waukesha County Inc · Baird Foundation Inc · Tatman Foundation · Wisconsin Public Service Foundation · Milwaukee Jewish Federation Inc

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Charles & Marcia Larsenanthony & Priscilla Beadell Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Charles & Marcia Larsenanthony & Priscilla Beadell Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    12report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Charles & Marcia Larsenanthony & Priscilla Beadell Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Charles & Marcia Larsenanthony & Priscilla Beadell Foundation 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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 77 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Charles & Marcia Larsenanthony & Priscilla Beadell’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home