Skip to content
Kmg Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Kmg Charitable Trust

Its FY2021 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$242k
Granted FY2019
8
Grants FY2019
4
States reached
$184k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

99% of Kmg Charitable Trust’s FY2021 grant dollars went to Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2021 names 1 organization directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2019, the last year Kmg Charitable Trust named its own grantees at scale: 6 organizations, $242k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

1
’17
2
’18
6
’19
1
’20
1
’21

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2021.

Philanthropy$548kPublic Benefit$272kCommunity Improvement$10kEducation$7kInternational$1kArts & Culture$250Other$0
02FY2019 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2019

  • Under $10k6 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $45k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $184k
$5,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE FUND FOR POLITICAL INNOVATION AND REFORM$183,750
FIX THE SYSTEM WISCONSIN$45,000
CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER$5,000
ARIEL EDUCATION INITIATIVE$5,000
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION$1,500
Individual grant recipient$1,000
BRIDGE ALLIANCE EDUCATION FUND$500
FRIENDS OF WISCONSIN PUBLIC TELEVISION INC$250
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–21) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 11% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%INITIATIVE FOR A COMPETITIVE INNER CITY: $10k → 16%BRIDGE ALLIANCE EDUCATION FUND: $500 → 16%CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER: $5k → 14%THE FUND FOR POLITICAL INNOVATION AND REFORM: $184k → 5%UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION: $2k → 10%GREATER MILWAUKEE COMMITTEE: $5k → 17%THE WATERFALL FOUNDATION INC: $7k → 13%MEDIATORS FOUNDATION: $1k → 12%ARIEL EDUCATION INITIATIVE: $5k → 14%FAIRVOTE: $250 → 8%BUSINESS FOR AMERICA: $1k → 14%FIX THE SYSTEM WISCONSIN: $45k → 5%FRIENDS OF WISCONSIN PUBLIC TELEVISION INC: $250 → 10%THE FUND FOR POLITICAL INNOVATION AND REFORM: $32k → 5%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.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
WI
MA
OH
PA
CO
MD
DC
GA
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 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
Wisconsin Policy Forum Inc

We conduct impartial public policy research and analysis to drive informed debate and effective decision-making in the state of wisconsin.

Public Benefit
2
Uwm Research Foundation Inc

Support research and innovation at the university of wisconsin - milwaukee by providing reserach funding, entrepreneurship support, and by engaging in corporate partnering activities to that end.

Community Improvement
3
Open Markets Institute

The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.

Education
4
Wisconsin Opportunity Coalition Inc

We are organized to support public policy that protects public education, the environment, the rights of all citizens and expands economic opportunity and fairness for everyone.

Civil Rights
5
Wisconsin Democracy Campaign Inc

Nonpartisan political watchdog group dedicated to clean government that advocates for a real democracy that allows the common good to prevail over narrow interests by reinforcing and protecting the values of honesty, fairness,…

Health
6
Milwaukee Women Inc

Milwaukee women inc is an organization of executives determined to change the quality and composition of corporate boards to maximize the performance of public and private companies with a focus on women and women of color.

Education
7
Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation

To support scientific research within the uw-madison community by providing financial support, actively managing assets, and moving innovations to the marketplace for a financial return and global impact.

Education
8
The Uwm Foundation Inc

The mission of the uwm foundation, inc. is to support the educational, literary, and scientific endeavors of the university of wisconsin-milwaukee by receiving, managing, and distributing gifts to benefit the university's students,…

Education
9
Fair Democracy

Fair democracy works to ensure that the roots of american democracy are healthy with strong voting rights and access, an engaged and informed electorate, an open and accountable government and trusted messengers engaging americans in civil…

Civil Rights
10
The Progressive Inc

The progressive, inc. publishes the progressive magazine, distributes editorial material to local and national newspapers, and may also produce educational television and radio programs.

—
11
One Wisconsin Now Inc

To advance progressive values, ideas and policies through research, policy, networking, advocacy and public education.

—
12
Issue One

Issue one is the leading crosspartisan political reform organization that educates the public, engages capitol hill, and advocates for solutions to fix our broken political system.

Public Benefit
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mediators Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Waterfall Foundation 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

12 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. 12 of the 14 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
8/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $541,692 · Community ImprovementFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUNDTHE FUND FOR POLITICAL INNOVATION AND REFORM: $216,207 · OtherTHE FUND FOR POLITICAL INNOVAT…+4 more: $7,350 · OtherFIX THE SYSTEM - WISCONSIN INC: $45,000 · Civil Rights+1 more: $250 · Civil RightsINITIATIVE FOR A COMPETITIVE INNER CITY INC: $10,000 · Housing & ShelterAriel Education Initiative: $5,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION: $1,500 · EducationBRIDGE ALLIANCE EDUCATION FUND: $500 · EducationTHE WATERFALL FOUNDATION INC: $6,500 · PhilanthropyTHE CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER INC: $5,000 · Crime & Legal
Community Improvement$541,692Other$223,557Civil Rights$45,250Housing & Shelter$10,000Education$7,000Philanthropy$6,500Crime & Legal$5,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $541,692 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFIX THE SYSTEM - WISCONSIN INC: $45,000 over 1y, 19% of budgetINITIATIVE FOR A COMPETITIVE INNER CITY INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE WATERFALL FOUNDATION INC: $6,500 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetGreater Milwaukee Committee for Community Development: $5,100 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetAriel Education Initiative: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMEDIATORS FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBRIDGE ALLIANCE EDUCATION FUND: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF PBS WISCONSIN INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFAIRVOTE: $250 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

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.

Morgan Stanley Global…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …
Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust IncIN9.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Kmg Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Kmg Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    3get 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 · 0–5%
    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 14 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 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Kmg’s 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