How much did GREATER WATERTOWN COMMUNITY HEALTH grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 58% of GREATER WATERTOWN COMMUNITY HEALTH’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2019

five attendancemental farmeworkactionpathculture continuouspediatric dentaldental access

2020

plan socialemotional learningstronglearningstrong resilientsocial emotionalactionchildcovid

2021

triplevillageemergencybellixcelchildcovidplayground

2022

fitnesspandemicbellixceltriplecovidwusd buildingplayground

2023

asqrentalwfcinclusivespace jeffersoncertificationsdoj

2024

focus groupect focusasqexpansionemployer sponsoredsponsored caredhs social

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 31 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k3 grants · $16k
$10k–50k20 grants · $480k
$50k–250k6 grants · $557k
$250k+2 grants · $3.9M

$25,500

Median grant

States reached

$131M

Total assets

Largest grants

GLACIAL COMMUNITY YMCA$3,687,189
ROCK RIVER COMMUNITY CLINIC$254,850
WATERTOWN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT$121,000
WI ALLIANCE FOR INFANT MENTAL HEALTH$113,140
MADISON COLLEGE$107,371
HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF WAUKESHA COUNTY$105,113
READING & MATH INC (WISCONSIN READING CORPS)$60,000
MARANATHA BAPTIST UNIVERSITY INC$50,399
GLACIAL HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP$39,692
RAINBOW HOSPICE$39,552
WATERLOO SCHOOL DISTRICT$36,300
ST PAUL'S LUTHERAN CHURCH & SCHOOL$35,000
LAKE MILLS MORAVIAN CHURCH$32,000
TRINITY ST LUKE'S$30,000
WISCONSIN EARLY CHILDHOOD ASSOCIATION (WECA)$27,207

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY18–24, $4.8M) land where the poverty rate runs at 6% — the area typically sits at 9%. 6% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; 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, United Way ALICE — 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 23% of GREATER WATERTOWN COMMUNITY HEALTH’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, 98% of the giving stays in WI; read by stated purpose it is 74% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

GREATER WATERTOWN COMMUNITY HEALTHlessmore of its giving

Placed by recipient address · 26% directed abroad (not shown)

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.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$15M · 33 repeat orgs$1.5M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +213% since the first grant, against +40% for the ones you funded once.

33 repeat relationships — 17 still active in FY2024, 16 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$15M

$1.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+213%

+40%

Still filing today

48%

52%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $377k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Human ServicesHealthEducationReligionFood & NutritionCommunity ImprovementOther

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

YA
YMCA AT PABST FARMS - WATERTOWN AREA YMCA
4× · 2018–2024 · $3.9M · revenue +126%
RR
ROCK RIVER COMMUNITY CLINIC
7× · 2018–2024 · $1.0M · revenue +405%
WF
WATERTOWN FAMILY CONNECTIONS
5× · 2018–2023 · $382k · revenue +365% · 60% of their budget

Funded once

CO
CITY OF JEFFERSON PARKS AND RECREATION
one grant, 2023 · $172k
CO
CITY OF JUNEAU
one grant, 2022 · $162k
TO
TOWN OF IXONIA PARK AND RECREATION
one grant, 2021 · $100k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

Wisconsin Lutheran Home Ministries

To provide healthcare for the elderly.

—

Wausau Child Care Inc

Strengthen child development, families and the community by providing access to safe, high quality early learning for children.

Human Services

Pathways of Wisconsin Inc

Pathways of wisconsin provides day services and employment services including job development, training, and day-to-day support to consumers with developmental disabilities.

Human Services

Chamber of Commerce - Greater Beloit

Chamber of commerce to support, ancourage and engage in activities that make the greater Beloit area a better place to live and do business.

Education

Wisconsin Manufacturing Extension

To provide targeted consulting services to small and medium manufacturers within our service territory in wisconsin.

Education

Child Care Centers of Marshfield Inc

To provide a child care center and a child and adult care food program

Human Services

Darlington Community Child Care Center Inc

Provide child care services to middle to low income families located in a financially distressed rural and lower populated southwestern wisconsin region

—

Goodwill Industries of South Central

Help people in our community to live, work and thrive through housing, employment and supportive services.

Employment

Lifeways of Wisconsin Inc

Operation of childcare centers based on the waldorf teaching method. nurturing children, families, caregivers and communities. lifeways welcomes children and families of any race, religion,

Human Services

Community Care Health Plan Inc

Community care health plan's mission is to develop and demonstrate innovative, flexible community-based approaches to care for at-risk adults in order to optimize their quality of life and optimize the allocation of community resources.we…

Health

Kenosha Community Health Center Inc

To provide access to health care services and reduce health disparities for the underserved people.

Health

Waukesha County Community Foundation

A community foundation with endowment funds that provide grant support to charities.

Philanthropy

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wisconsin Alliance for Infant Mental and the most unlike its peers is Society St Vincent De Paul Council. 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 24 years old; the field is 19. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 17% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 7% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

1%1/76

the rest of the field

567/7,581

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.

06the grantee network

42 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

40/42

Grantees still filing

38/42

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$9,710,700Human Services$4,754,333Health$1,098,992Education$373,696Youth Development$189,000Community Improvement$173,854Religion$145,107

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.

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.

Greater Milwaukee Foundation IncWI20.3× affinity9 shared granteesties to 8 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Greater Milwaukee Foundation Inc · Green Bay Packers Foundation · Fort Healthcare Inc · United Way of Dodge County Inc · United Way of Greater Milwaukee & · Community Foundation for the Fox Valley · Lake Mills Area Community Foundation Inc · Beaver Dam Community Hospitals · Otto Bremer Trust · Greater Green Bay Community · Joseph and Sharon Darcey Foundation · Earl and Eugenia Quirk Foundation Inc

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 organisation GREATER WATERTOWN COMMUNITY HEALTH 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

0get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: WATERTOWN FAMILY CONNECTIONS.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

medium risk

~5 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 8 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

8 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 4.6× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 800605916 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on WATERTOWN FAMILY CONNECTIONS, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

WatchFinancial stability— Roughly 5 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 60% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Greater Watertown Community Health?

Find your warmest path to Greater Watertown Community Health through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

GREATER WATERTOWN COMMUNITY HEALTH

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

42 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Greater Watertown Community Health?

More from the funding graph

GREATER WATERTOWN COMMUNITY HEALTH

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

42 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Greater Watertown Community Health?

More from the funding graph