Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Hugh & Helena Brogan 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.

$37k
Granted FY2025still arriving
14
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What you fund
01

What you funded, over time

By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 48% of HUGH & HELENA BROGAN FOUNDATION INC’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.

02FY2025 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$3,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$668k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ROOTED WI$5,000
CARENET PREGNACY CENTER OF DANE COU$5,000
FAMILY PROMISE OF WAUKESHA COUNTY$4,000
LEARNING ATRIUM$3,500
EVANGELICAL CATHOLIC$3,000
RIDGES SANCTUARY INC$3,000
THE SALVATION ARMY$3,000
GATHERING WATERS CONSERVANCY$2,500
WISCONSIN GREEN FIRE$2,000
NATURAL RESOURCE FOUNDATION$2,000
CROSSROADS AT BIG CREEK$1,500
CAMP LUTHER$1,000
PORTAGE COUNTY LITERACY COUNCIL$1,000
BOYS GIRLS CLUB OF DOOR COUNTY$500
02The need
03

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 (FY17–25, $22k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 43% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 12%COVENANT HOUSE MICHIGAN: $3k → 21%COVENANT HOUSE MICHIGAN: $2k → 21%CARENET PREGNACY CENTER OF DANE COU: $5k → 10%COVENANT HOUSE MICHIGAN: $2k → 21%CARENET PREGNACY CENTER OF DANE COU: $4k → 10%COVENANT HOUSE MICHIGAN: $2k → 21%CARENET PREGNANCY CENTER OF DANE CO: $4k → 10%COVENANT HOUSE MICHIGAN: $2k → 21%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 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.

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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$277k · 27 repeat orgs$24k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +67% since the first grant, against -17% for the ones you funded once.

27 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2025, 14 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

27
8

Total granted

$277k
$19k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+67%
-17%

Still filing today

52%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
EnvironmentEducationHuman ServicesHousing & ShelterAnimalsFood & NutritionOther

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

  • FAMILY PROMISE OF WAUKESHA COUNTY INC
    7× · 2019–2025 · $30k · revenue +336%
  • TR
    THE RIDGES SANCTUARY INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $29k · revenue +79%
  • TE
    THE EVANGELICAL CATHOLIC INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $18k · revenue +28%

Funded once

  • SA
    STOUGHTON AREA FOUNDATION APPORTUNI
    one grant, 2020 · $6k
  • AF
    APPORTUNITY FUND
    one grant, 2019 · $5k
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF LAPHAM PARK
    one grant, 2023 · $2k

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.

1
Land Conservancy of West Michigan

Our mission is conserving West Michigans ecologically critical land. We protect land by creating public nature preserves, providing support to communities and local governments in creating natural areas, and helping private landowners…

Environment
2
Southeast Wisconsin Land Conservancy

Obtain and manage land of ecological significance.

Environment
3
Landmark Conservancy Inc

Landmark conservancy is a nationally accredited, nonprofit conservation organization serving 20 counties across northwest wisconsin. their mission is to conserve wisconsin's natural legacy for everyone...forever.

Environment
4
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
5
Pro-Life Wisconsin Inc

Defend the right to life of all citizens of our state, whether born or preborn, young, old, disabled, or terminally ill. we affirm that the right to life exists at the moment of fertilization and extends until natural death.

6
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
7
Central Conservation Inc

To empower a constellation of environmental organizations working to care for our earth.

Environment
8
The River Alliance of Wisconsin Inc

To empower people to protect and restore water.

Environment
9
Waukesha County Land Conservancy Inc

To protect environmentally senstive land in waukesha county wisconsin

Environment
10
Glacial Lakes Conservancy Inc

Glacial Lakes Conservancy, as a land trust, is a nonprofit organization that, as part of its mission, actively works to conserve land by undertaking or assisting in land or conservation easement acquisitions.

Environment
11
Grand Traverse Regional Land Conservancy

The mission of gtrlc is to protect significant natural, scenic and farm lands and advance land stewardship now and for future generations.

Environment
12
Disability Rights Wisconsin Inc

Legal protection and advocacy to protect the rights of people with disabilities in wisconsin.

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Gathering Waters Inc and the most unlike its peers is Covenant House Michigan. 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 38 years old; the field is 21. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number18%0%<5yr12%10%5–10yr19%15%10–20yr18%25%20–35yr16%25%35–55yr18%25%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value18%0%<5yr12%9%5–10yr19%21%10–20yr18%28%20–35yr16%12%35–55yr18%30%55yr+

The field is 18% 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 0.0% lost their exemption, against 10% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/22
the rest of the field
10%
1,393/13,928

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.

04the grantee network

19 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 19 of the 37 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/19
Grantees still filing
16/19
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

NATURAL RESOURCE FOUNDATION — $18,000 · OtherNATURAL RESOURCE FOUNDATIONBOYS GIRLS CLUB OF DOOR COUNTY — $16,000 · OtherBOYS GIRLS CLUB OF DOOR COUNTYCAMP LUTHER INC — $15,000 · OtherCAMP LUTHER INCTHE SALVATION ARMY — $14,000 · OtherTHE SALVATION ARMYTHE GATHERING TABLE INC — $12,000 · OtherTHE GATHERING TABLE INCTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $10,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYSEXUAL ABUSE SURVIVORS MONUMENT — $10,000 · OtherSEXUAL ABUSE SURVIVORS MONUMENTSTOUGHTON AREA FOUNDATION APPORTUNI — $6,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient — $5,000 · OtherAPPORTUNITY FUND — $5,000 · Other+14 more — $38,400 · Other+14 moreGATHERING WATERS INC — $13,000 · EnvironmentGATHERING WATE…CROSSROADS AT BIG CREEK INC — $12,500 · EnvironmentCROSSROADS AT …WISCONSIN'S GREEN FIRE INCORPORATED — $8,000 · EnvironmentWISCONSIN'S GR…ROOTED WI INC — $5,000 · EnvironmentROOTED WI INCDOOR COUNTY LAND TRUST INC — $2,500 · EnvironmentDOOR COUNTY LA…FAMILY PROMISE OF WAUKESHA COUNTY INC — $30,000 · Housing & ShelterFAMILY PRO…THE RIDGES SANCTUARY INC — $28,500 · AnimalsTHE RIDGES…CARE NET PREGNANCY CENTER OF DANE COUNTY INC — $12,500 · Human ServicesCOVENANT HOUSE MICHIGAN — $9,500 · Human ServicesEMERALD COAST AUTISM CENTER IN — $10,700 · EducationLEARNING ATRIUM INC — $9,500 · EducationTHE EVANGELICAL CATHOLIC INC — $18,000 · ReligionINTERFAITH FOOD PANTRY OF PORTAGE COUNTY INC — $1,500 · Food & Nutrition
Other$149,400Environment$41,000Housing & Shelter$30,000Animals$28,500Human Services$22,000Education$20,200Religion$18,000Food & Nutrition$1,500

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetFAMILY PROMISE OF WAUKESHA COUNTY INC — $30,000 over 7y, 1.9% of budgetTHE RIDGES SANCTUARY INC — $28,500 over 9y, 0.3% of budgetTHE EVANGELICAL CATHOLIC INC — $18,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetGATHERING WATERS INC — $13,000 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetCROSSROADS AT BIG CREEK INC — $12,500 over 9y, 0.4% of budgetCARE NET PREGNANCY CENTER OF DANE COUNTY INC — $12,500 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetEMERALD COAST AUTISM CENTER IN — $10,700 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $10,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetCOVENANT HOUSE MICHIGAN — $9,500 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetLEARNING ATRIUM INC — $9,500 over 3y, 1.6% of budgetWISCONSIN'S GREEN FIRE INCORPORATED — $8,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetPORTAGE COUNTY LITERACY COUNCIL INC — $4,900 over 7y, 1.8% of budgetRAWHIDE INC — $4,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CLEARING — $3,500 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetDOOR COUNTY LAND TRUST INC — $2,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetINTERFAITH FOOD PANTRY OF PORTAGE COUNTY INC — $1,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetWISCONSIN RIGHT TO LIFE INC — $500 over 1y, 0.2% of budget
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 FAMILY PROMISE OF WAUKESHA COUNTY INC
  • Who funds THE RIDGES SANCTUARY INC
  • Who funds THE EVANGELICAL CATHOLIC INC
  • Who funds GATHERING WATERS INC
  • Who funds CROSSROADS AT BIG CREEK INC
  • Who funds CARE NET PREGNANCY CENTER OF DANE COUNTY INC
  • Who funds THE GATHERING TABLE INC
  • Who funds EMERALD COAST AUTISM CENTER IN
  • Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY
  • Who funds COVENANT HOUSE MICHIGAN
  • Who funds LEARNING ATRIUM INC
  • Who funds WISCONSIN'S GREEN FIRE INCORPORATED
  • Who funds ROOTED WI INC
  • Who funds PORTAGE COUNTY LITERACY COUNCIL INC
  • Who funds RAWHIDE INC
  • Who funds THE CLEARING
  • Who funds DOOR COUNTY LAND TRUST INC
  • Who funds INTERFAITH FOOD PANTRY OF PORTAGE COUNTY INC
  • Who funds WISCONSIN RIGHT TO LIFE 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.

Herbert H Kohl Charities IncWI17.3× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Herbert H Kohl Charities Inc · Green Bay Packers Foundation · Hislop Family Foundation · John C Bock Foundation · Door County Community Foundation Inc · Wisconsin Public Service Foundation · Community Foundation for the Fox Valley Region Inc · Greater Milwaukee Foundation Inc · Alliant Energy Foundation Inc · Baird Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 organization Hugh & Helena Brogan 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Hugh & Helena Brogan Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Hugh & Helena Brogan 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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 37 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph