Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

International Association for Clear Thinking 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.

$92k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What you fund
01

What you funded, over time

By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 55% of INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR CLEAR THINKING 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 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $85k
$25,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$239k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WI HOOAH$25,000
YOU BELONG$25,000
VALLEY PACKAGING INDUSTRIES INC$25,000
PRO FIRE FIGHTERS OF WISCONSIN$10,000
GRAND CHUTE POLICE DEPT$6,518
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 (FY18–23, $85k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%LEAVEN INC: $25k → 6%LEAVEN INC: $24k → 6%LEAVEN INC: $16k → 6%LEAVEN INC: $13k → 6%LEAVEN INC: $8k → 6%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.

74%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$601k · 12 repeat orgs$212k to everyone else

12 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
11

Total granted

$601k
$127k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+31%
+328%

Still filing today

58%
18%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 7% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $85k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthHuman ServicesPublic Safety & DisasterEmploymentPublic BenefitPhilanthropyOther

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

  • LI
    LEAVEN INC
    5× · 2018–2023 · $85k · revenue +5%
  • RI
    RAWHIDE INC
    3× · 2018–2022 · $75k · revenue +37%
  • BI
    BEAMING INC
    5× · 2018–2023 · $71k · revenue +218%

Funded once

  • CO
    CITY OF APPLETON POLICE DEPARTMENT
    one grant, 2021 · $25k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2018 · $25k
  • OC
    OUTAGAMIE COUNT SHERIFF DEPT
    one grant, 2020 · $23k

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
Free Range Psychiatry Inc

Our mission is to help people holistically come off psychiatric medications by empowering them to connect to their inner wisdom and heal root causes of dis-ease.

Health
2
Fox Valley Hands of Hope Inc

We provide compassionate guidance and support for the grieving. Fox Valley Hands of Hope is a nonprofit organization dedicated to providing expert support for children, families, and adults who are experiencing grief, loss, or…

3
Stable Recovery Inc

To provide a safe and stable living environment for men in early recovery. we are a peer driven therapeutic community with a focus on equine-related employment opportunities.

Health
4
Open Employment

The purpose of Open Employment, Inc. is to provide job placement services for people with disabilities, veterans, and others who experience employment in the community it serves.

Employment
5
Wings of Hope Therapeutic Riding Program Inc
6
Wallowa Valley Center for Wellness Inc

Strength in every struggle and hope in every heart.

Health
7
Palouse River Counseling Center Inc

To provide mental health and chemical dependency prevention and treatment programs in Whitman County, Washington.

Health
8
Crossroads Industries Inc

Provides work activity for the mentally and physically disabled.

Employment
9
Recovery Benefits Corp

Valley recovery partners (vrp) is committed to enhancing the lives of individuals in recovery by offering comprehensive services and opportunities for personal and professional development. our mission is to eliminate barriers to accessing…

Human Services
10
Rock Valley Community Programs Inc

Rock valley community programs, inc.'s (rvcp) mission is to provide transitional and supportive housing, addictions and mental health treatment services to adults in the rock county area, through evidence based models for the future and…

Crime & Legal
11
Waubonsie Mental Health Center

Waubonsie mental health center serves to promote and enhance community mental health values and to provide responsive and accessible mental health services and service coordination to the individuals who reside in fremont, montgomery, and…

Health
12
Innovative Services Inc

Innovative services, inc. (isi) cares for those with disabilities, helping them lead fulfilling lives with maximum independence. innovative's vision is to be the most trusted care provider for people with disabilities in wisconsin.

Human Services

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Leaven Inc and the most unlike its peers is Friends of the Appleton Fire Department 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

11 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. 11 of the 27 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
9/11
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

RAWHIDE INC — $75,000 · OtherRAWHIDE INCSAMARITAN COUNSELING CENTER OF THE FOX VALLEY INC — $41,000 · OtherSAMARITAN COUNSELING CENTER OF THE FOX VALLEY INCOUTAGAMIE CTY SHERIFF DEPT — $38,450 · OtherOUTAGAMIE CTY SHERIFF DEPTCOMMUNITY OF HOPE INC — $35,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY OF HOPE INCTHE MOORING PROGRAMS INCORPORATED — $34,700 · OtherTHE MOORING PROGRAMS INCORPORATEDGRAND CHUTE POLICE DEPARTMENT — $30,721 · OtherGRAND CHUTE POLICE DEPARTMENTCOMMUNITY FOR HOPE — $30,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY FOR HOPECITY OF APPLETON POLICE DEPARTMENT — $25,000 · OtherCITY OF APPLETON POLICE DEPARTMENTIndividual grant recipient — $25,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientYOU BELONG INC — $25,000 · OtherYOU BELONG INCWINNECONNE SCHOOL — $25,000 · OtherWINNECONNE SCHOOLOUTAGAMIE COUNT SHERIFF DEPT — $23,400 · Other+7 more — $36,856 · Other+7 moreBEAMING INC — $71,475 · HealthBEAMING INCWisconsin Meaningful Alternatives Inc — $70,000 · HealthWisconsin Meaningful Alterna…CROSSFIRE RANCH INC — $64,575 · HealthCROSSFIRE RANCH INCLEAVEN INC — $85,035 · Human ServicesLEAVEN INCVALLEY PACKAGING INDUSTRIES INC — $25,000 · EmploymentHOOAH WI INC — $25,000 · Public BenefitOPENCOLLECTIVE FOUNDATION — $15,000 · PhilanthropyFRIENDS OF THE APPLETON FIRE DEPARTMENT INC — $12,150 · Public Safety & Disaster
Other$445,127Health$206,050Human Services$85,035Employment$25,000Public Benefit$25,000Philanthropy$15,000Public Safety & Disaster$12,150

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetLEAVEN INC — $85,035 over 5y, 1.9% of budgetRAWHIDE INC — $75,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetBEAMING INC — $71,475 over 5y, 8.7% of budgetWisconsin Meaningful Alternatives Inc — $70,000 over 3y, 5.5% of budgetCROSSFIRE RANCH INC — $64,575 over 4y, 15% of budgetSAMARITAN COUNSELING CENTER OF THE FOX VALLEY INC — $41,000 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetTHE MOORING PROGRAMS INCORPORATED — $34,700 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetOPENCOLLECTIVE FOUNDATION — $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE APPLETON FIRE DEPARTMENT INC — $12,150 over 1y, 79% 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 LEAVEN INC
  • Who funds RAWHIDE INC
  • Who funds BEAMING INC
  • Who funds Wisconsin Meaningful Alternatives Inc
  • Who funds CROSSFIRE RANCH INC
  • Who funds SAMARITAN COUNSELING CENTER OF THE FOX VALLEY INC
  • Who funds THE MOORING PROGRAMS INCORPORATED
  • Who funds VALLEY PACKAGING INDUSTRIES INC
  • Who funds HOOAH WI INC
  • Who funds OPENCOLLECTIVE FOUNDATION
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE APPLETON FIRE DEPARTMENT 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.

Community Foundation for the Fox Valley Region IncWI21.8× affinity8 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation for the Fox Valley Region Inc · Green Bay Packers Foundation · J J Keller Foundation Inc · US Ventureschmidt Family Foundation · John and Julie Schmidt Family Foundation · United Way Fox Cities Inc · Oshkosh Area Community Foundation Corporation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 International Association for Clear Thinking 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 · 00%6%23%51%90%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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.

    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 27 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