Skip to content
Coles Family Foundation co Peter Coles at a glance

· Private foundation

Coles Family Foundation co Peter Coles

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.

$62k
Granted FY2024still arriving
17
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$21k
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, FY2020 to 2024.

Recreation & Sports$112kEnvironment$74kArts & Culture$45kYouth Development$17kCommunity Improvement$12kAnimals$12kHealth$12kHuman Services$9kOther$0
02FY2024 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k16 grants · $41k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $21k
$2,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$849k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Lake Park Friends$21,000
Northwoods Land Trust Inc$6,000
Riveredge$5,000
North Point Lighthouse Friends$3,000
TRUE Skool$2,500
Wisconsin Trust for Historic Preservation$2,500
Wisconsin Society for Ornithology$2,500
Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin$2,500
Great Headwaters Trail Foundation$2,500
Historic Milwaukee$2,500
The Nature Conservancy Wisconsin$2,500
Bicycle Federation of Wisconsin$2,500
Camp Manito-Wish$2,500
Milwaukee Preservation Alliance$1,500
St Mary's County Arts Council$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 (FY20–23, $7k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Kids Forward: $3k → 10%Kids Forward: $2k → 10%Kids Forward: $2k → 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.
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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$276k · 19 repeat orgs$20k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +29% since the first grant, against +25% for those funded once.

19 repeat relationships: 15 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
8

Total granted

$276k
$16k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+29%
+25%

Still filing today

79%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
Arts & CultureEnvironmentHealthPhilanthropyScience & TechHuman ServicesOther
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

  • NL
    NORTHWOODS LAND TRUST INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $26k · revenue +82%
  • NP
    NORTH POINT LIGHTHOUSE FRIENDS INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $13k · revenue +160%
  • BICYCLE FEDERATION OF WISCONSIN EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION INC
    4× · 2021–2024 · $12k · revenue +29%

Funded once

  • RK
    Rufus King High School
    one grant, 2022 · $5k
  • JO
    JCC of San Francisco
    one grant, 2020 · $4k
  • TN
    The Nature Conservancy - WI chapter
    one grant, 2022 · $3k
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
Friends of Wisconsin State Parks Inc

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

Recreation & Sports
2
Milwaukee Public Museum Inc

The milwaukee public museum inspires curiosity, excites minds and increases desire to preserve and protect our world's natural and cultural diversity through exhibitions, educational programs, collections and research.

Arts & Culture
3
Natural Resources Foundation of

To protect wisconsin's lands, waters, and wildlife by providing funding, leading partnerships, and connecting all people with nature.

—
4
Milwaukee Parks Foundation Inc

Engage our community in supporting milwaukee county parks to collectively steward a thriving park system.

Environment
5
Wisconsin Museum of Nature and Culture

WMNC will continue constructing the new Milwaukee Public Museum facility to completion and will then continue as the owner and operator of the new museum.

Arts & Culture
6
Milwaukee Riverkeeper Inc

Our mission is to protect water quality and wildlife habitat in the river corridors and to advocate for sound land use in the Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic River Watersheds.

Environment
7
Fund for Lake Michigan Inc

Lake Michigan is one of Wisconsin's greatest assets, and its water is critical to the state's future. The Fund for Lake Michigan is here to help sustain the Lake on behalf of the people and places that depend on it. Our goal is to have a…

Environment
8
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
9
Milwaukee Audubon Society Inc

Protect and restore Wisconsin's natural heritage and ecology through active leadership, education and stewardship

Environment
10
Northeast Wisconsin Land Trust Inc

To preserve lands that protect our waters, landscapes and natural habitats in northeast wisconsin. ne wisconsin is critical to the health of the largest freshwater estuaries in the world-lake michigan's crucial wetlands.

Environment
11
West Wisconsin Land Trust Inc

The mission of the west wisconsin land trust, inc. is to preserve western wisconsin's natural character by informing, facilitating, and partnering with private landowners, communities, and local governments to protect valuable land.

—
12
Wisconsin Land and Water Conservation Association Inc

To protect, conserve, and enhance wisconsin's natural resources by advocating for and supporting county conservation efforts, for current and future generations.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Kids Forward Inc; the most unlike its peers is American Heart Association 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

21 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. 21 of the 31 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/21
Grantees still filing
12/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LAKE PARK FRIENDS LTD: $101,000 · PhilanthropyLAKE PARK FRIENDS LTD+1 more: $2,000 · PhilanthropyRiveredge: $21,550 · OtherRiveredgeHISTORIC MILWAUKEE INC: $11,500 · OtherHISTORIC MILWAUKEE INCCAMP MANITO-WISH YMCA INC: $11,500 · OtherCAMP MANITO-WISH YMCA INCThe Nature Conservancy Wisconsin: $6,000 · OtherThe Nature Conservancy WisconsinRufus King High School: $5,000 · OtherRufus King High SchoolPatuxent Tidewater Land Trust: $4,200 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $4,000 · OtherJCC of San Francisco: $3,500 · OtherST MARY'S COUNTY ARTS COUNCIL INC: $3,500 · OtherKIDS FORWARD INC: $9,000 · OtherKIDS FORWARD INC+7 more: $11,600 · Other+7 moreNORTH POINT LIGHTHOUSE FRIENDS INC: $13,000 · Arts & CultureNORTH POINT LI…WISCONSIN TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION INC: $11,500 · Arts & CultureWISCONSIN TRUS…TRUE SKOOL INC: $9,000 · Arts & CultureTRUE SKOOL INCMKE BLACK INC: $3,500 · Arts & CultureMKE BLACK INCMILWAUKEE PRESERVATION ALLIANCE: $1,500 · Arts & CultureNORTHWOODS LAND TRUST INC: $26,000 · EnvironmentNORTHWOODS LA…RIVEREDGE NATURE CENTER INC: $7,000 · EnvironmentRIVEREDGE NAT…SOUTHERN MARYLAND RC&D BOARD INC: $1,800 · EnvironmentBICYCLE FEDERATION OF WISCONSIN EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION INC: $12,100 · Community ImprovementPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF WISCONSIN INC: $11,500 · Health+1 more: $50 · HealthTHE WISCONSIN SOCIETY FOR ORNITHOLOGY INC: $10,000 · Science & Tech
Philanthropy$103,000Other$91,350Arts & Culture$38,500Environment$34,800Community Improvement$12,100Health$11,550Science & Tech$10,000

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 budgetLAKE PARK FRIENDS LTD: $101,000 over 5y, 7.7% of budgetNORTHWOODS LAND TRUST INC: $26,000 over 5y, 0.8% of budgetNORTH POINT LIGHTHOUSE FRIENDS INC: $13,000 over 5y, 4.5% of budgetBICYCLE FEDERATION OF WISCONSIN EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION INC: $12,100 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF WISCONSIN INC: $11,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetHISTORIC MILWAUKEE INC: $11,500 over 5y, 0.6% of budgetCAMP MANITO-WISH YMCA INC: $11,500 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetWISCONSIN TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION INC: $11,500 over 5y, 2.3% of budgetTHE WISCONSIN SOCIETY FOR ORNITHOLOGY INC: $10,000 over 4y, 1.6% of budgetKIDS FORWARD INC: $9,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetTRUE SKOOL INC: $9,000 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetRIVEREDGE NATURE CENTER INC: $7,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $4,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetST MARY'S COUNTY ARTS COUNCIL INC: $3,500 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetGREAT HEADWATERS TRAILS FOUNDATION INC: $2,500 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetGREATER MILWAUKEE FOUNDATION INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSOUTHERN MARYLAND RC&D BOARD INC: $1,800 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetMILWAUKEE PRESERVATION ALLIANCE: $1,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHOLLYWOOD VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $50 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.

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.

Herbert H Kohl Charit…Greater Milwaukee Fou…Barbara Meyer Elsner …Dudley and Constance …Joseph and Vera Zilbe…Baird Foundation IncFidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Herbert H Kohl Charities IncWI17.4× affinity6 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Herbert H Kohl Charities Inc · Greater Milwaukee Foundation Inc · Barbara Meyer Elsner Foundation · Dudley and Constance Godfrey Foundation Inc · Joseph and Vera Zilber Family Foundation Inc · Baird Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Coles Family Foundation co Peter Coles funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Coles Family Foundation co Peter Coles. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 84%
  • St Mary's County Arts Council Inc: 84% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
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 31 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 Coles Family Foundation co Peter Coles’ 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