· Community foundation
Greater Cedarburg Foundation Inc
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 19 grants below total $193,602 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $237,952 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $44,350 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k10 grants · $68k
- $10k–50k9 grants · $125k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ADVENT LUTHERAN CHURCH | $23,000 |
| EMMANUEL LUTHERAN CHURCH | $22,500 |
| OZAUKEE COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY | $15,950 |
| OZAUKEE NONPROFIT CENTER | $13,500 |
| OZAUKEE FAMILY SERVICES | $10,500 |
| SAUKVILLE COMMUNITY FOOD PANTRY INC | $10,000 |
| TOWN OF CEDARBURG | $10,000 |
| CEDARBURG LANDMARK PRESERVATION SOCIETY INC | $10,000 |
| OZAUKEE COUNTY PLANNING AND PARKS DEPARTMENT | $10,000 |
| CEDARBURG CULTURAL CENTER | $9,787 |
| WISCONSIN MUSEUM OF QUILTS & FIBER ARTS | $7,500 |
| INTERFAITH CAREGIVERS OF OZAUKEE COUNTY | $7,300 |
| HARVARD UNIVERSITY | $7,000 |
| MEQUON-THIENSVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT | $6,815 |
| CEDARBURG ART MUSEUM & SOCIETY INC | $6,500 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY20–24, $186k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 7% of Greater Cedarburg Foundation Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 74% of the giving stays in WI; read by stated purpose it is 71% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
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 foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
12 repeat relationships — 11 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 69% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $57k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
OZAUKEE FAMILY SERVICES INC4× · 2020–2024 · $176k · revenue +32%
CEDARBURG CULTURAL CENTER INC5× · 2020–2024 · $80k · revenue +10%
Purdue Research Foundation4× · 2020–2023 · $49k · revenue +28%
Funded once
The Trustees of Princeton Universitygraduatedone grant, 2020 · $21k · revenue +51%- CUCOMMUNITY UNITED METHODIST CHURCHone grant, 2020 · $15k
FAMILY PROMISE OF OZAUKEE COUNTYone grant, 2023 · $15k · revenue -30%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
The museum is an educational institution dedicated to preserving the history and culture of waukesha county.
The milwaukee county historical society was founded in 1935 to collect, preserve, and make available materials relating to the history of the milwaukee community.
To inspire stewardship by creating educational experiences where history and rivers come alive.
The mission of the oshkosh area community foundation corporation is to strengthen our communities. the organization accomplishes this through: leadership and funding to address current and emerging needs; collaboration and partnership with…
To promote oshkosh and winnebago county a premier destination for corporate, sports, and leisure groups and individual visitors.
Our mission is to build a better Racine through the social, physical, and economic revitalization of our neighborhoods.
Preserve and enhance the Wisconsin State Fair Park and support agriculture education and arts programming tied to the fair.
Protect the rural character of the village of Caledonia, Racine county, Wisconsin.
Enhance the well-being of old world wisconsin
To conserve the natural environment of the cedar lakes region.
Provide training and informational materials to families of children and youth with disabilities to enable them to understand and use the supports and services provided by private and public health care and community systems.
Making the arts accessible to all
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ozaukee County Historical Society and the most unlike its peers is Cedarburg Friends of Parks and Recreation Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 40 years old; the field is 19. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 9% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
19 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 19 of the 30 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds OZAUKEE FAMILY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds CEDARBURG CULTURAL CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Purdue Research Foundation ↗
- Who funds OZAUKEE COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds RIVEREDGE NATURE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds CEDARBURG ART MUSEUM & SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds SAUKVILLE COMMUNITY FOOD PANTRY INC ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗
- Who funds The Trustees of Princeton University ↗
- Who funds OZAUKEE NONPROFIT CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds FAMILY PROMISE OF OZAUKEE COUNTY ↗
- Who funds FAMILY SHARING OF OZAUKEE COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds CEDARBURG LANDMARK PRESERVATION SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds GREATER MILWAUKEE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CEDARBURG FRIENDS OF PARKS AND RECREATION INC ↗
- Who funds LAKESHORE REGIONAL CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds WISCONSIN MUSEUM OF QUILTS & FIBER ARTS INC ↗
- Who funds INTERFAITH CAREGIVERS INC ↗
- Who funds ADVOCATES OF OZAUKEE INC ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Greater Milwaukee Foundation Inc · Green Bay Packers Foundation · Baird Foundation Inc · United Way of Northern Ozaukee Inc · The Clarence Wallace & Dolores Lynch Wallace Family Foundation · Port Washington Kiwanis Foundation · The Bruce Krier Charitable Foundation · United Way of Greater Milwaukee & Waukesha County Inc · Herbert H Kohl Charities Inc · American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Greater Cedarburg Foundation Inc funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- The Trustees of Princeton University — 11% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Greater Cedarburg Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Greater Cedarburg Foundation Inc through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.