· Private foundation
Jean & Thomas Harbeck Family Foundation
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k27 grants · $55k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $150k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| HISTORIC HAY MARKET MILWAUKEE | $150,000 |
| MILWAUKEE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA | $7,500 |
| DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS | $6,000 |
| MILWAUKEE RESCUE MISSION | $6,000 |
| CHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA | $5,000 |
| THE SOCIETY TO PRESERVA THE MILLVALE MURALS OF MAXO VANKA | $5,000 |
| INTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS | $5,000 |
| SALVATION ARMY | $2,500 |
| ANTARCTIC HERITAGE TRUST | $2,500 |
| JUBILATE CHORALE | $2,500 |
| FRIEND OF THE DOMES | $2,500 |
| UPAFORG | $1,200 |
| WORLD MONUMENTS FUND | $1,000 |
| FAMILY PROMISE OF WAUKESH | $1,000 |
| INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE | $1,000 |
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 (FY17–24, $7k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 92% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +31% since the first grant, against +16% for the ones you funded once.
66 repeat relationships — 21 still active in FY2025, 45 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 19% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $161k 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
MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC9× · 2017–2025 · $53k · revenue +98%
MILWAUKEE PUBLIC MUSEUM INC7× · 2017–2024 · $29k · revenue +20%
Save The Children Federation Inc7× · 2017–2024 · $23k · revenue +21%
Funded once
- TWThe Wisconsin Philharmonic Incone grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +16%
- WHWINDBER HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +105%
PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATIONone grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue -14%
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.
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
We conduct impartial public policy research and analysis to drive informed debate and effective decision-making in the state of wisconsin.
Water.org's goal is to bring safe water and sanitation to the world through access to small, affordable loans.
Improve the food value chain in developing countries by mobilizing corporate volunteers to share knowledge and expertise with small and growing food processors.
The organization's mission is to build partnerships to enhance compassionate care globally. we are dedicated to improving access to hospice and palliative care worldwide.
World coffee research unites the global coffee industry to drive science-based agricultural solutions to urgently secure a diverse and sustainable supply of quality coffee today and for generations to come. our mission is to grow, protect,…
To promote public health, safety, and welfare through the improvement of the quality and quantity of drinking water and the development and furtherance of understanding of the problems relating thereto.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
The mission of health care without harm (hcwh) is to transform health care worldwide so that it reduces its environmental footprint, becomes a community anchor for sustainability and a leader in the global movement for environmental health…
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
Wildlife conservation global, inc. operates the okapi conservation project (ocp) which works in the democratic republic of the congo with the institute in congo for the conservation of nature (iccn) and local communities throughout the…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Pencils of Promise Incorporated and the most unlike its peers is Tigerlion Arts. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 34 years old; the field is 20. 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.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 8% 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.
77 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 77 of the 123 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 Historic Haymarket Milwaukee Inc ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds MILWAUKEE PUBLIC MUSEUM INC ↗
- Who funds MILWAUKEE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA INC ↗
- Who funds Save The Children Federation Inc ↗
- Who funds AUDUBON SOCIETY OF WESTERN PA ↗
- Who funds WORLD MONUMENTS FUND INC ↗
- Who funds PROJECT HOPE - THE PEOPLE-TO-PEOPLE HEALTH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Hope Center Inc ↗
- Who funds LAKE AREA FREE CLINIC INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICARES FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY MUSIC SCHOOL OF SPRINGFIELD INC ↗
- Who funds DIRECT RELIEF ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
- Who funds INTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS ↗
- Who funds The Wisconsin Philharmonic Inc ↗
- Who funds WINDBER HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE SOCIETY TO PRESERVE THE MILLVALE MURALS OF MAXO VANKA ↗
- Who funds PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds CHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA ↗
- Who funds WORLD BICYCLE RELIEF NFP ↗
- Who funds PROHEALTH CARE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE CHARLES E KUBLY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds WAUKESHA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY LAKE SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds FAMILY PROMISE OF WAUKESHA COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ONE ACRE FUND ↗
- Who funds MILWAUKEE DOMES ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds WATER WELLS FOR AFRICA ↗
- Who funds Water Underground ↗
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: Herbert H Kohl Charities Inc · Greater Milwaukee Foundation Inc · United Way of Greater Milwaukee & Waukesha County Inc · Waukesha County Community Foundation · Baird Foundation Inc · Ge Aerospace Foundation · Windhover Foundation Inc · Green Bay Packers Foundation · STACKNER FAMILY FOUNDATION INC co KRISTIN A OCCHETTI · Evan & Marion Helfaer Foundation · Maihaugen Foundation Inc Agency Xxxxxx2262 · Emil Ewald Family 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 organization Jean & Thomas Harbeck Family Foundation 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.
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Americares Foundation Inc — 0% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 0% of income from government
- Place of Hope Inc — 0% 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 Jean & Thomas Harbeck Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Jean & Thomas Harbeck Family Foundation 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.