Skip to content

· Private foundation

Debeck Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$162k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$50k
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, FY2020 to 2025.

Education$361kRecreation & Sports$30kHealth$25kFood & Nutrition$3k
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $8k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $105k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$11,486
Median grant
3
States reached
$106k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION$50,000
SPELMAN COLLEGE$30,000
FOUNDATION FOR DANE COUNTY PARKS$30,000
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-WHITEWATER$13,404
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-STEVENS POINT$11,486
THE HARBOR RECOVERY CENTER$10,000
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION$10,000
MINNESOTA STATE UNIVERSITY$3,000
BADGER PRAIRE NEEDS NETWORK$2,500
MAYO CLINIC$2,000
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 (FY25–25, $30k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%FOUNDATION FOR DANE COUNTY PARKS: $30k → 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 Debeck Foundation Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 77% of the giving stays in WI; by stated purpose, 66%.

Debeck 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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$365k · 11 repeat orgs$53k to everyone else

11 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
4

Total granted

$365k
$21k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-5%
+21%

Still filing today

45%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $33k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationHuman ServicesFood & NutritionOther
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
    5× · 2021–2025 · $168k · revenue -8%
  • SC
    Spelman College
    3× · 2023–2025 · $60k · revenue -10%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-STEVENS POINT
    3× · 2023–2025 · $24k

Funded once

  • HU
    HERZING UNIVERSITY LTD
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue +21%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS SYSTEM
    one grant, 2020 · $5k
  • EB
    ETHNOS360 BIBLE INSTITUTE
    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
Upper Iowa University

Upper iowa university provides quality educational opportunities accessible through varied delivery methods to inspire success and empower lives.

Education
2
Bradley University

Bradley university empowers students for immediate and sustained success in their personal and professional endeavors by combining professional preparation, liberal arts and sciences, and co-curricular experiences. alongside our dedication…

Education
3
Point Park University

Provides innovative education in a dynamic urban setting. dedicated to academic excellence and community engagement,we prepare students of diverse backgrounds with the knowledge, skill,and experience to lead meaningful lives as informed…

—
4
Furman University

The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.

Education
5
Delaware Valley University

See schedule o.we are inspired by the ideals of our founder who, in 1896, emphasized respect for all people and ideas, who honored knowledge with practice, progress and the common good. our historical commitment to experiential learning…

—
6
Saint Xavier University

Saint xavier university, a catholic institution inspired by the heritage of the sisters of mercy, educates persons to search for truth, think critically, communicate effectively and serve wisely and compassionately in support of human…

Education
7
Dordt University

As an institution of higher education committed to the reformed christian perspective, dordt university equips students, alumni, and the broader community to work effectively toward christ-centered renewal in all aspects of contemporary…

Education
8
Wilson College

Wilson college empowers students to be confident and critical thinkers, creative visionaries, effective communicators, honorable leaders, and agents of justice.

Education
9
Nebraska Wesleyan University

Nebraska wesleyan university is an academic community dedicated to intellectual and personal growth within the context of a liberal arts education and in an environment of christian concern.

Education
10
State University of Iowa Alumni Association

Our mission is to strengthen the university of iowa through alumni engagement. we do this through our communications, alumni programs, and events.

—
11
Clarke University of Dubuque Iowa

We are a Catholic, co-educational, liberal arts university founded in 1843 by the Sisters of Charity of the Blessed Virgin Mary in Dubuque, Iowa. Clarke educates students at the post-secondary level in the liberal arts and sciences, the…

Education
12
Boston Architectural College

The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of Wisconsin Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Badger Prairie Needs Network 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

8 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. 8 of the 17 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION: $168,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATIONSpelman College: $60,000 · EducationSpelman CollegeUNIVERSITY OF DUBUQUE: $17,709 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF DUBUQUETHE UW-PLATTEVILLE FOUNDATION AND ALUMNI ASSOCIATION INC: $14,500 · EducationMADISON AREA TECHNICAL COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC: $10,961 · EducationHERZING UNIVERSITY LTD: $10,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-STEVENS POINT: $24,157 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-STEV…UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-WHITEWATER: $21,283 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-WHIT…THE HARBOR RECOVERY CENTER: $20,000 · OtherTHE HARBOR RECOVERY CENTERMINNESOTA STATE UNIVERSITY: $14,245 · OtherMINNESOTA STATE UNIVERSITYUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN: $9,500 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSINUNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS SYSTEM: $5,000 · OtherMAYO CLINIC: $4,500 · Other+2 more: $5,721 · Other+2 moreFOUNDATION FOR DANE COUNTY PARKS INC: $30,000 · Human ServicesBADGER PRAIRIE NEEDS NETWORK INC: $2,500 · Food & Nutrition
Education$281,170Other$104,406Human Services$30,000Food & Nutrition$2,500

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

25%50%75%100%$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION: $168,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetSpelman College: $60,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF DUBUQUE: $17,709 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE UW-PLATTEVILLE FOUNDATION AND ALUMNI ASSOCIATION INC: $14,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetMADISON AREA TECHNICAL COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC: $10,961 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetHERZING UNIVERSITY LTD: $10,000 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 Spelman College ↗
  • Who funds FOUNDATION FOR DANE COUNTY PARKS INC ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF DUBUQUE ↗
  • Who funds THE UW-PLATTEVILLE FOUNDATION AND ALUMNI ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds MADISON AREA TECHNICAL COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds HERZING UNIVERSITY LTD ↗
  • Who funds BADGER PRAIRIE NEEDS NETWORK 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 Foundation IncWI13.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Alliant Energy Foundation Inc · American Endowment Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 Debeck Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Debeck Foundation Inc. 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%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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 17 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 Debeck’s filings →

    More from the funding graph