Skip to content

· Private foundation

David S Bourne 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.

$108k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$20k
Largest
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 2025.

Food & Nutrition$223kArts & Culture$84kEnvironment$60kHuman Services$58kEducation$15k
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $95k
$10,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK OF SOUTHERN WISCONSIN$20,000
BIODYNAMIC ASSOCIATION$15,000
MADISON BACH MUSICIANS$10,000
GOODMAN COMMUNITY CENTER$10,000
ROOTED WI INC$10,000
GOODMAN COMMUNITY CENTER$10,000
REAP FOOD GROUP$10,000
HEALTHY FOOD FOR ALL$10,000
MUSIC CON BRIO INC$8,000
EAST MADISON COMMUNITY CENTER$5,000
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, $58k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%EAST MADISON COMMUNITY CENTER: $10k → 10%GOODMAN COMMUNITY CENTER: $10k → 10%GOODMAN COMMUNITY CENTER: $10k → 10%EAST MADISON COMMUNITY CENTER: $5k → 10%EAST MADISON COMMUNITY CENTER: $5k → 10%EAST MADISON COMMUNITY CENTER: $5k → 10%EAST MADISON COMMUNITY CENTER: $5k → 10%EAST MADISON COMMUNITY CENTER CORPORATION: $4k → 10%EAST MADISON COMMUNITY CENTER CORPORATION: $4k → 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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 11% of David S Bourne Foundation Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 97% of the giving stays in WI; by stated purpose, 86%.

David S Bourne Foundation Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$387k · 12 repeat orgs$53k to everyone else

12 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
1

Total granted

$387k
$8k

Still filing today

58%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 58% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $45k 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
Food & NutritionHuman ServicesArts & CultureEnvironmentEducationOther
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

  • RF
    REAP FOOD GROUP INC
    8× · 2017–2025 · $95k · revenue +42%
  • MB
    MADISON BACH MUSICIANS
    8× · 2017–2025 · $50k · revenue +98%
  • EM
    EAST MADISON COMMUNITY CENTER INC
    7× · 2017–2025 · $38k · revenue +23%

Funded once

  • FF
    FOOD FOR THOUGHT INITIATIVE CO SECOND HARVEST FOODBANK
    one grant, 2020 · $8k
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
Groundwork Milwaukee Inc

Bring about the sustained regeneration, improvement, and management of the physical environment by developing community-based partnerships that empower people, businesses, and organizations to promote environmental, economic, and social…

Environment
2
Renew Wisconsin Inc

Renew wisconsin leads and accelerates the transformation to wisconsin's renewable energy future through advocacy, education, and collaboration.

Environment
3
Madison Area Food Pantry Gardens

Create community-level nutrition security through gleaning and growing first-choice fresh nutritious and culturally relevant produce for donation to the local emergency food system.

Human Services
4
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.

—
5
Mill City Farmers Market Inc

Mission: to inspire and nurture a healthy community by building a local, sustainable, and organic food economy in a vibrant experiential marketplace.vision: to be a nationally recognized marketplace model that connects, educates, and…

—
6
NourishMKE Inc

We're a network of community food centers that specializes in food, love, and community. Hunger is a real problem, and access to food should be a fundamental right. No one should be made to feel they're not deserving of nourishment when…

Food & Nutrition
7
Madison Community Cooperative

Madison community cooperative's mission is to improve the madison community by providing low-cost, not-for-profit cooperative housing for very low to moderate income people and to be inclusive of underrepresented and marginalized groups.

Education
8
Fairshare Csa Coalition

To promote community supported agriculture (csa) in wisconsin and strive to ensure that all families have access to locally produced, organic food and have strong connections to their farms, food, and community.

Food & Nutrition
9
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
10
Wisconsin Waterfowl Association Inc

The purpose of the association shall be to restore and conserve wisconsin's waterfowl and wetland resources; to educate state waterfowlers during their progression from natural resource consumer to steward; and to promote governmental…

Environment
11
Uwm Research Foundation Inc

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.

Community Improvement
12
University Research Park Incorporated

The organization acquires, holds, administers, and distributes real and personal property for the benefit of the university of wisconsin (uw)-madison.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rooted Wi Inc; the most unlike its peers is Music Con Brio Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

10 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. 10 of the 16 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/10
Grantees still filing
4/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

REAP FOOD GROUP INC: $95,000 · Food & NutritionREAP FOOD GROUP INCSECOND HARVEST FOODBANK OF SOUTHERN WI: $35,000 · Food & NutritionSECOND HARVEST FOODBANK OF SOUTHERN W…BIODYNAMIC ASSOCIATION INC: $15,000 · Food & NutritionBIODYNAMIC ASSOCIATION INCMUSIC CON BRIO INC: $24,000 · OtherMUSIC CON BRIO INCIndividual grant recipient: $20,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCOMMUNITY GROUNDWORKS INC: $15,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY GROUNDWORKS INCFOOD FOR THOUGHT INITIATIVE: $15,000 · OtherFOOD FOR THOUGHT INITIATIVEHANDEL ARIA COMPETITION INC: $10,000 · OtherHANDEL ARIA COMPETITION INCHEALTHY FOOD FOR ALL: $10,000 · OtherHEALTHY FOOD FOR ALLCENTER FOR INTEGRATED AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS: $10,000 · OtherCENTER FOR INTEGRATED AGRICU…FOOD FOR THOUGHT INITIATIVE CO SECOND HARVEST FOODBANK: $7,500 · OtherFOOD FOR THOUGHT INITIATIVE …ROOTED WI INC: $60,000 · EnvironmentROOTED WI INCEAST MADISON COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $38,000 · Human ServicesEAST MADISON C…IRWIN A AND ROBERT D GOODMAN COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $20,000 · Human ServicesIRWIN A AND RO…MADISON BACH MUSICIANS: $50,000 · Arts & CultureMADISON BACH…UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION: $15,000 · Education
Food & Nutrition$145,000Other$111,500Environment$60,000Human Services$58,000Arts & Culture$50,000Education$15,000

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 budgetREAP FOOD GROUP INC: $95,000 over 8y, 1.9% of budgetROOTED WI INC: $60,000 over 6y, 1.0% of budgetMADISON BACH MUSICIANS: $50,000 over 8y, 4.4% of budgetEAST MADISON COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $38,000 over 7y, 1.3% of budgetSECOND HARVEST FOODBANK OF SOUTHERN WI: $35,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMUSIC CON BRIO INC: $24,000 over 2y, 18% of budgetIRWIN A AND ROBERT D GOODMAN COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY GROUNDWORKS INC: $15,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetBIODYNAMIC ASSOCIATION INC: $15,000 over 1y, 2.3% 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 REAP FOOD GROUP INC ↗
  • Who funds ROOTED WI INC ↗
  • Who funds MADISON BACH MUSICIANS ↗
  • Who funds EAST MADISON COMMUNITY CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds SECOND HARVEST FOODBANK OF SOUTHERN WI ↗
  • Who funds MUSIC CON BRIO INC ↗
  • Who funds IRWIN A AND ROBERT D GOODMAN COMMUNITY CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY GROUNDWORKS INC ↗
  • Who funds BIODYNAMIC ASSOCIATION 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.

Madison Gas and Electric Foundation IncWI19.9× affinity7 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Madison Gas and Electric Foundation Inc · Madison Community Foundation · United Way of Dane County Inc · The Evjue Foundation Inc · Alliant Energy Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 David S Bourne Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from David S Bourne Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s 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)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    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 16 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 David S Bourne’s filings →

    More from the funding graph