Skip to content
Clack Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Clack Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$1.3M
Granted FY2025still arriving
20
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$488k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Education$2.4MHealth$2.4MEmployment$1.2MRecreation & Sports$447kInternational$425kAnimals$245kReligion$100kHuman Services$52kOther$0
02FY2025 · 20 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $12k
  • $10k–50k9 grants · $170k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $307k
  • $250k+2 grants · $788k
$30,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$36M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION$488,000
CINCINNATI CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL$300,000
MARC INC$77,408
CANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE$70,000
EASTER SEALS WISCONSIN INC$60,000
FOUNDATION FOR INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION IN NEUROLOGICAL SURGERY$50,000
WINMAN TRAILS INC$50,000
MISERICORDIA FOUNDATION$30,000
TAILS TOGETHER CO$30,000
HUMANE ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY$30,000
LITTLE FOREST SCHOOL INC$20,000
CAMP JORN YMCA$20,000
WISCONSIN ACADEMY FOR GRADUATING SERVICE DOGS INC$10,000
HOWARD YOUNG FOUNDATION$10,000
RHINELANDER KIWANIS FOUNDATION INC$10,000
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 (FY17–25, $309k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 60% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Canine Companions: $80k → 9%Scholl Community Impact Group: $5k → 10%CANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE: $70k → 15%SCHOLL COMMUNITY IMPACT GROUP: $1k → 10%Canine Companions for Independence: $25k → 15%CANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE: $25k → 15%MISERICORDIA FOUNDATION: $30k → 14%Misericordia Heart of Mercy Center: $20k → 14%Misericordia Heart of Mercy Center: $10k → 14%Misericordia Heart of Mercy Center: $5k → 14%MOVIN' OUT INC: $20k → 10%THE ARC - DANE COUNTY: $9k → 10%THE ARC - DANE COUNTY: $9k → 10%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.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
IL
WI
OH
CA
AR
LA
FL
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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$8.1M · 24 repeat orgs$533k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +49% since the first grant, against +39% for those funded once.

24 repeat relationships: 13 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

24
16

Total granted

$8.1M
$383k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+49%
+39%

Still filing today

67%
31%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $150k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesRecreation & SportsArts & CultureEducationPhilanthropyAnimalsOther
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

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION
    9× · 2017–2025 · $2.8M · revenue +39%
  • CJ
    CAMP JORN YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $455k · revenue +63%
  • CC
    CANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE INC
    4× · 2020–2025 · $200k · revenue +70%

Funded once

  • VA
    VERNON AREA REHABILITATION CENTER INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $250k · revenue +39%
  • SC
    Seton Catholic Schools
    one grant, 2020 · $75k
  • MO
    MOVIN OUT INC
    one grant, 2017 · $20k · revenue -11%
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
Northwoods Inc of Wisconsin

Service for disabled adults

Human Services
2
Pathways of Wisconsin Inc

Pathways of wisconsin provides supported employment opportunities and empowerment through quality, person-centered programming for individuals of all abilities.

Human Services
3
Access Ability Wisconsin Inc

Access ability wisconsin, inc (aaw)'s mission is to provide expertise and resources to promote access and opportunities for people with temporary or permanent mobility challenges (such as injuries resulting in paralysis) to experience…

Recreation & Sports
4
Northwest Wisconsin Concentrated Employment Program Inc

Our mission at northwest cep is to create connections that will empower individuals and groups to drive workforce and community growth.

Employment
5
Wisconsin Wildlife Federation Inc

The wisconsin wildlife federation has a dual mission to engage in conservation education and to advocate for sound conservation policy.

Environment
6
Missaukee Humane Society

Humane treatement of animals

Animals
7
Wisconsin Youth Company Inc

Wisconsin youth company's mission is to engage youth in opportunities to encourage them to be their best selves.

—
8
Wisconsin Rural Opportunities Inc

To foster the vitality of rural wisconsin, primarily through the promotion of education, improvement of health care services, cultural experiences, and support of the rural economic base.

—
9
Wisconsin Association of Lakes Inc

The mission of the wisconsin association of lakes is to conserve, enhance, and restore wisconsin's 15,000 lakes to ensure their sustainability for the benefit and collective use and enjoyment for this and future generations.

Environment
10
Waukesha County Land Conservancy Inc

To protect environmentally senstive land in waukesha county wisconsin

Environment
11
Wisconsin Badger Camp Inc

The mission of wisconsin badger camp is to serve people with developmental disabilities by providing quality outdoor recreational experiences.

—
12
Friends of Wisconsin State Parks Inc

To preserve, promote, protect, and enhance wisconsin state parks, forests, trails, and recreation areas.

Recreation & Sports
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Easter Seals Wisconsin Inc; the most unlike its peers is Rhinelander Kiwanis Foundation 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

27 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 27 of the 47 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
27/27
Grantees still filing
18/27
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CINCINNATI CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL: $2,100,000 · OtherCINCINNATI CHILDREN'S HOSPITALMARC INC: $1,005,200 · OtherMARC INCUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN CARBONE CANCER CENTER: $367,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN CARBONE CANCER CENTERFIENS: $250,000 · OtherFIENSVERNON AREA REHABILITATION CENTER INC: $250,000 · OtherVERNON AREA REHABILITATION CENTER INC+26 more: $488,794 · Other+26 moreUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION: $2,815,120 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION+1 more: $5,000 · EducationCAMP JORN YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION INC: $455,000 · Recreation & SportsWINMAN TRAILS INC: $50,000 · Recreation & Sports+2 more: $4,000 · Recreation & SportsCANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE INC: $200,000 · Human ServicesMISERICORDIA HOME: $35,000 · Human ServicesMISERICORDIA FOUNDATION: $30,000 · Human ServicesMOVIN OUT INC: $20,000 · Human ServicesTHE ARC - DANE COUNTY INC: $18,000 · Human Services+1 more: $6,000 · Human ServicesFOUNDATION FOR INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION IN: $275,000 · InternationalEASTER SEALS WISCONSIN INC: $130,000 · HealthHUMANE ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY OF WAUKESHA COUNTY INC: $80,000 · AnimalsPAWS CHICAGO: $34,000 · Animals
Other$4,460,994Education$2,820,120Recreation & Sports$509,000Human Services$309,000International$275,000Health$130,000Animals$114,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION: $2,815,120 over 9y, 0.2% of budgetCAMP JORN YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION INC: $455,000 over 9y, 16% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION IN: $275,000 over 3y, 65% of budgetVERNON AREA REHABILITATION CENTER INC: $250,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetCANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE INC: $200,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetEASTER SEALS WISCONSIN INC: $130,000 over 3y, 1.8% of budgetHUMANE ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY OF WAUKESHA COUNTY INC: $80,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetWISCONSIN ACADEMY FOR GRADUATE SERVICE DOGS INC: $65,000 over 7y, 5.0% of budgetNORTH LAKELAND DISCOVERY CENTER INC: $38,000 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetMISERICORDIA HOME: $35,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetPAWS CHICAGO: $34,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetManitowish Waters Fire Company: $32,900 over 3y, 2.1% of budgetMISERICORDIA FOUNDATION: $30,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHOWARD YOUNG FOUNDATION INC: $22,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetMOVIN OUT INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetTHE ARC - DANE COUNTY INC: $18,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetSCHOLL COMMUNITY IMPACT GROUP INC: $6,000 over 2y, 4.2% of budgetNEW TRIER EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetDANCE WISCONSIN INC: $3,000 over 2y, 3.0% of budgetTHREE GAITS INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetMANITOWISH WATERS BIKE TRAIL INC: $2,000 over 1y, 4.6% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF DANE COUNTY INC: $300 over 1y, 0.0% 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 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds CAMP JORN YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds FOUNDATION FOR INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION IN ↗
  • Who funds VERNON AREA REHABILITATION CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds CANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE INC ↗
  • Who funds EASTER SEALS WISCONSIN INC ↗
  • Who funds HUMANE ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY OF WAUKESHA COUNTY INC ↗
  • Who funds WISCONSIN ACADEMY FOR GRADUATE SERVICE DOGS INC ↗
  • Who funds WINMAN TRAILS INC ↗
  • Who funds NORTH LAKELAND DISCOVERY CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds MISERICORDIA HOME ↗
  • Who funds PAWS CHICAGO ↗
  • Who funds Manitowish Waters Fire Company ↗
  • Who funds MISERICORDIA FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds HOWARD YOUNG FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds LITTLE FOREST SCHOOL INC ↗
  • Who funds MOVIN OUT INC ↗
  • Who funds THE ARC - DANE COUNTY INC ↗
  • Who funds RHINELANDER KIWANIS FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds SCHOLL COMMUNITY IMPACT GROUP INC ↗
  • Who funds NEW TRIER EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Pickles Group Inc ↗
  • Who funds DANCE WISCONSIN INC ↗
  • Who funds THREE GAITS INC ↗
  • Who funds MANITOWISH WATERS BIKE TRAIL 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.

Alliant Energy Founda…Baer Family IncHerbert H Kohl Charit…Green Bay Packers Fou…May Family Foundation…Pukall Lumber Foundat…United Way of Dane Co…Madison Gas and Elect…Madison Community Fou…Baird Foundation IncAbbVie FoundationNational Philanthropi…
Alliant Energy Foundation IncWI16.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Alliant Energy Foundation Inc · Baer Family Inc · Herbert H Kohl Charities Inc · Green Bay Packers Foundation · May Family Foundation Inc · Pukall Lumber Foundation Inc · United Way of Dane County Inc · Madison Gas and Electric Foundation Inc · Madison Community Foundation · Baird Foundation Inc · AbbVie Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust

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 Clack Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Clack Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    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.

    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 47 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Clack’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