Skip to content
Hinrichs Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Hinrichs 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.

$29k
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$8k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Health$90kRecreation & Sports$49kEnvironment$47kAnimals$35kHuman Services$25kReligion$13kEducation$11kHousing & Shelter$4kOther$0
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,500
Median grant
3
States reached
$491k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CAMP MANITO-WISH YMCA$8,000
STEM TO STERN$4,000
GONGAZA UNIVERSITY MEN'S ROWING$4,000
SAND COUNTY FOUNDATION$2,000
CHILDREN'S ONCOLOGY SERVICE OF IL$2,000
KENOSHA ACHIEVEMENT CENTER$1,500
THE LINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY$1,500
VOLUNTEER CENTER OF RACINE COUNTY$1,500
MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION$1,500
CHIWAUKEE PRAIRIE PRESERVATION FD$1,157
KENOSHA COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY$1,000
DES PLAINES WETLANDS CONSERVANCY INC$1,000
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, $22k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, 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%VOLUNTEER CENTER OF RACINE COUNTY: $2k → 10%HOSPICE ALLIANCE INC: $2k → 10%HOSPICE ALLIANCE INC: $2k → 10%HOSPICE ALLIANCE INC: $2k → 10%HOSPICE ALLIANCE INC: $1k → 10%HOSPICE ALLIANCE INC: $1k → 10%HOSPICE ALLIANCE INC: $1k → 10%KENOSHA ACHIEVEMENT CENTER: $2k → 10%KENOSHA ACHIEVEMENT CENTER: $2k → 10%KENOSHA ACHIEVEMENT CENTER: $2k → 10%KENOSHA ACHIEVEMENT CENTER: $2k → 10%KENOSHA ACHIEVEMENT CENTER: $2k → 10%KENOSHA ACHIEVEMENT CENTER: $2k → 10%KENOSHA ACHIEVEMENT CENTER: $2k → 10%KENOSHA ACHIEVEMENT CENTER: $1k → 10%KENOSHA ACHIEVEMENT CENTER: $1k → 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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$265k · 26 repeat orgs$17k to everyone else

26 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

26
11

Total granted

$265k
$16k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-15%
+103%

Still filing today

50%
45%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k 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
HealthHuman ServicesAnimalsRecreation & SportsEnvironmentEducationOther
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

  • KY
    KENOSHA YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $16k · revenue +62%
  • LP
    LINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY
    8× · 2018–2025 · $16k · revenue +16%
  • CP
    CHIWAUKEE PRAIRIE PRESERVATION FUND INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $15k · revenue +45%

Funded once

  • TL
    THE LINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL
    one grant, 2017 · $3k
  • CO
    Childrens Oncology Services Incgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $3k · revenue +113%
  • NS
    NUEVA SCHOOLgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $2k · revenue +103%
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
Kenosha Community Health Center Inc

Kenosha community health center, inc.'s purpose is to provide primary care and referral health services to disadvantaged and underserved populations and promote and ensure that basic primary health services are accessible to uninsured and…

Health
2
Humane Animal Welfare Society of Waukesha County Inc

The humane animal welfare society of waukesha county leads the community in animal welfare and assures sanctuary for animals in need.

Animals
3
Kenosha Community Foundation

We lead, serve and collaborate with donors to create enduring philanthropy.

Philanthropy
4
Southeast Wisconsin Land Conservancy

Obtain and manage land of ecological significance.

Environment
5
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
6
Gathering Waters Inc

Gathering waters (wisconsin's alliance for land trusts) strengthens land trusts to protect wisconsin's special places and grow healthy, vibrant communities. the stronger the alliance between gathering waters' staff and board members, land…

Environment
7
Wisconsin Land and Water Conservation Association Inc

To protect, conserve, and enhance wisconsin's natural resources by advocating for and supporting county conservation efforts, for current and future generations.

Environment
8
Wisconsin Wildlife Federation Inc

The wisconsin wildlife federation has a dual mission to engage in conservation education and to advocate for sound conservation policy.

Environment
9
Wisconsin Association of Lakes Inc

The mission of the wisconsin association of lakes is to conserve, enhance, and restore wisconsin's 15,000 lakes to ensure their sustainability for the benefit and collective use and enjoyment for this and future generations.

Environment
10
Wisconsin Council of the Blind and Visua

The wisconsin council of the blind and visually impaired's mission is to promote the dignity and empowerment of people in wisconsin who are blind and visually impaired by providing services, advocating legislation, and educating the…

Health
11
Oshkosh Convention & Visitors Bureau Inc

To promote oshkosh and winnebago county a premier destination for corporate, sports, and leisure groups and individual visitors.

—
12
Natural Resource Development Association Inc

The natural resource development association supports policies that lead to proper, necessary, and conscientious resource development and conservation. by engaging community leaders, laborers, manufacturers, and job creators in the…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Kenosha Area Family and Aging Services Inc; the most unlike its peers is Muscular Dystrophy Association Inc. 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

19 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. 19 of the 38 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/19
Grantees still filing
12/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CAMP MANITO-WISH YMCA INC: $24,000 · OtherCAMP MANITO-WISH YMCA INCCHILDREN'S ONCOLOGY SERVICE OF IL: $17,000 · OtherCHILDREN'S ONCOLOGY SERVICE OF ILCHIWAUKEE PRAIRIE PRESERVATION FUND INC: $14,613 · OtherCHIWAUKEE PRAIRIE PRESERVATION FUND INCGONGAZA UNIVERSITY MEN'S ROWING: $13,000 · OtherGONGAZA UNIVERSITY MEN'S ROWINGVALLEY OF THE KINGS SANCTUARY: $12,500 · OtherVALLEY OF THE KINGS SANCTUARYTHE SAND COUNTY FOUNDATION INC: $10,550 · OtherTHE SAND COUNTY FOUNDATION INCCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF CHICAGO: $10,200 · OtherCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF CHICAGOMEDICAL COLLEGE OF WI CANCER CENTER: $9,450 · OtherMEDICAL COLLEGE OF WI CANCER CENTERNAT'L MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY: $7,940 · OtherKENOSHA AREA FAMILY AND AGING SERVICES INC: $7,200 · OtherH CHRIS HYSLOP FOUNDATION: $5,500 · Other+13 more: $29,550 · Other+13 moreKENOSHA COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY: $17,000 · AnimalsKENOSHA COUNT…LINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $15,500 · AnimalsLINCOLN PARK …KENOSHA YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION INC: $16,000 · Recreation & SportsKENOSHA YO…Stem to Stern Inc: $9,000 · Recreation & SportsStem to St…DES PLAINES WETLANDS CONSERVANCY INC: $13,100 · EnvironmentTHE WETLANDS INITIATIVE: $8,500 · EnvironmentKENOSHA ACHIEVEMENT CENTER INC: $12,500 · Human ServicesHOSPICE ALLIANCE INC: $7,500 · Human ServicesVOLUNTEER CENTER OF RACINE COUNTYINC: $1,500 · Human ServicesMUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION INC: $13,340 · HealthChildrens Oncology Services Inc: $2,500 · HealthWISCONSIN OVARIAN CANCER ALLIANCE INC: $1,000 · HealthNUEVA SCHOOL: $1,800 · EducationUW-WHITEWATER FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 · Education
Other$161,503Animals$32,500Recreation & Sports$25,000Environment$21,600Human Services$21,500Health$16,840Education$2,800

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 budgetCAMP MANITO-WISH YMCA INC: $24,000 over 9y, 0.2% of budgetKENOSHA COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY: $17,000 over 9y, 0.4% of budgetKENOSHA YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION INC: $16,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetLINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $15,500 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetCHIWAUKEE PRAIRIE PRESERVATION FUND INC: $14,613 over 9y, 1.1% of budgetMUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION INC: $13,340 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetDES PLAINES WETLANDS CONSERVANCY INC: $13,100 over 9y, 0.5% of budgetKENOSHA ACHIEVEMENT CENTER INC: $12,500 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SAND COUNTY FOUNDATION INC: $10,550 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetStem to Stern Inc: $9,000 over 2y, 8.2% of budgetTHE WETLANDS INITIATIVE: $8,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetHOSPICE ALLIANCE INC: $7,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetKENOSHA AREA FAMILY AND AGING SERVICES INC: $7,200 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetChildrens Oncology Services Inc: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNUEVA SCHOOL: $1,800 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUW-WHITEWATER FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWISCONSIN OVARIAN CANCER ALLIANCE INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY NORTHWOODS INC: $500 over 1y, 0.2% 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 CAMP MANITO-WISH YMCA INC ↗
  • Who funds KENOSHA COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds KENOSHA YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds LINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds CHIWAUKEE PRAIRIE PRESERVATION FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds DES PLAINES WETLANDS CONSERVANCY INC ↗
  • Who funds KENOSHA ACHIEVEMENT CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds THE SAND COUNTY FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Stem to Stern Inc ↗
  • Who funds THE WETLANDS INITIATIVE ↗
  • Who funds HOSPICE ALLIANCE INC ↗
  • Who funds KENOSHA AREA FAMILY AND AGING SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds Childrens Oncology Services Inc ↗
  • Who funds NUEVA SCHOOL ↗
  • Who funds VOLUNTEER CENTER OF RACINE COUNTYINC ↗
  • Who funds UW-WHITEWATER FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds WISCONSIN OVARIAN CANCER ALLIANCE INC ↗
  • Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY NORTHWOODS 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.

AbbVie FoundationBaxter International …Greater Milwaukee Fou…Green Bay Packers Fou…The Chicago Community…Baird Foundation IncThe Blackbaud Giving …The Pfizer Foundation…Morgan Stanley Global…National Philanthropi…American Online Givin…American Endowment Fo…
AbbVie FoundationIL16.3× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: AbbVie Foundation · Baxter International Foundation · Greater Milwaukee Foundation Inc · Green Bay Packers Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · Baird Foundation Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Hinrichs Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Hinrichs Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    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 38 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 Hinrichs’ 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