Skip to content
Ellen Bracken Wiese Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Ellen Bracken Wiese Foundation

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.

$63k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$25k
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, FY2022 to 2025.

Animals$72kPublic Benefit$65kCivil Rights$50kHealth$35kHuman Services$33kHousing & Shelter$20kRecreation & Sports$15kEducation$10kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $50k
$10,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$5.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE BOND BETWEEN$25,000
DEMOCRACY FORWARD FOUNDATION$15,000
PROPEL NONPROFITS$10,000
CURLS ON THE BLOCK$7,500
BLOOD CANCER UNITED$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 (FY23–23, $25k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%THIS OLD HORSE: $25k → 6%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.

39%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$120k · 3 repeat orgs$190k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +141% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
8

Total granted

$120k
$152k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+141%
0%

Still filing today

67%
88%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 40% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $38k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
HealthAnimalsPhilanthropyCivil RightsHuman ServicesEducationOther
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

  • TB
    THE BOND BETWEEN
    3× · 2022–2025 · $55k · revenue +25%
  • BB
    BALLOT BUDDY
    2× · 2023–2024 · $50k
  • TK
    THE KYLE PEASE FOUNDATION INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $15k · revenue +141%

Funded once

  • MA
    MIDWEST ACCESS COALITION
    one grant, 2022 · $50k · revenue -43%
  • TO
    THIS OLD HORSE INC
    one grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue -9%
  • LR
    LITTLE RED DOOR CANCER AGENCY INC
    one grant, 2024 · $20k · revenue 0%
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
Targeting Resistance in Cancer Cooperative
Health
2
Md Anderson Foundation
Philanthropy
3
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc

The mission of dfci is to provide expert, compassionate, and equitable care to children, adults, and their families, while advancing the understanding, diagnosis, treatment, cure, and prevention of cancer and related diseases. we train new…

Health
4
We Beat Cancer
Philanthropy
5
The Adoptable Dog
Animals
6
Access to Cancer Care Foundation
—
7
Brca Research and Cure Alliance
Health
8
Born Free Foundation
—
9
Global Animal Partnership
Animals
10
Power to Decide

Power to decide envisions a world where everyone - no matter who they are or where they live - has control over their bodies and can decide if, when, and under what circumstances to get pregnant and have a child. its mission is to advance…

Human Services
11
Bold Foundation
Human Services
12
The Pink Journey Foundation
Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Little Red Door Cancer Agency Inc; the most unlike its peers is Wild and Free Foundation. 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

12 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. 12 of the 15 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)
12/12
Grantees still filing
5/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE BOND BETWEEN: $55,000 · AnimalsTHE BOND BETWEENWILD AND FREE FOUNDATION: $12,000 · AnimalsWILD AND FREE FOUNDATIONBALLOT BUDDY: $50,000 · OtherBALLOT BUDDYCURLS ON THE BLOCK: $7,500 · OtherCURLS ON THE BLOCKAMANDAS FARM ANIMAL RESCUE: $5,000 · OtherAMANDAS FARM ANIMAL RESCUEDEMOCRACY FORWARD FOUNDATION: $15,000 · OtherDEMOCRACY FORWARD FOUNDATIONADOPT-A-CLASSROOM INC: $10,000 · OtherADOPT-A-CLASSROOM INCMIDWEST ACCESS COALITION: $50,000 · Civil RightsMIDWEST ACCESS COA…LITTLE RED DOOR CANCER AGENCY INC: $20,000 · HealthLITTLE RED D…Small Choices Foundation: $10,000 · HealthSmall Choice…BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $5,000 · HealthBLOOD CANCER…THIS OLD HORSE INC: $25,000 · Human ServicesTHIS OLD …THE KYLE PEASE FOUNDATION INC: $14,500 · PhilanthropyPROPEL NONPROFITS: $10,000 · PhilanthropyEMMA NORTON SERVICES: $20,000 · Housing & Shelter
Animals$67,000Other$87,500Civil Rights$50,000Health$35,000Human Services$25,000Philanthropy$24,500Housing & Shelter$20,000

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 budgetTHE BOND BETWEEN: $55,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetMIDWEST ACCESS COALITION: $50,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetTHIS OLD HORSE INC: $25,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetLITTLE RED DOOR CANCER AGENCY INC: $20,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetEMMA NORTON SERVICES: $20,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetDEMOCRACY FORWARD FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE KYLE PEASE FOUNDATION INC: $14,500 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetWILD AND FREE FOUNDATION: $12,000 over 1y, 5.6% of budgetPROPEL NONPROFITS: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetADOPT-A-CLASSROOM INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSmall Choices Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $5,000 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.

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.

Ch Robinson Worldwide…The Minneapolis Found…The Blackbaud Giving …Charities Aid Foundat…Saint Paul & Minnesot…McKesson Foundation I…Thrivent Financial fo…Mightycause Charitabl…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…Raymond James Charita…National Philanthropi…American Endowment Fo…
Ch Robinson Worldwide FoundationSD15.1× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ch Robinson Worldwide Foundation · The Minneapolis Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Charities Aid Foundation America · Saint Paul & Minnesota Foundation · McKesson Foundation Inc · Thrivent Financial for Lutherans · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment 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 Ellen Bracken Wiese Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ellen Bracken Wiese Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%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
    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 · 0–75%
    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 15 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 Ellen Bracken Wiese’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