Skip to content

· Private foundation

Lou and Michele Gentine Foundation Inc

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$1.1M
Granted FY2024still arriving
30
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$312k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Recreation & Sports$1.5MEducation$936kHealth$820kHuman Services$551kCivil Rights$250kHousing & Shelter$230kReligion$147kInternational$140kOther$0
02FY2024 · 30 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $1k
  • $10k–50k22 grants · $435k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $357k
  • $250k+1 grant · $312k
$25,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$17M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME$311,795
ROGERS BEHAVIORAL HEALTH$75,000
CATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICES$75,000
ARCH DIOCESE OF MILWAUKEE$57,456
WI RIGHT TO LIFE$50,000
WOMENS CARE CENTER MKE$50,000
SETON CATHOLIC SCHOOLS-MILW$50,000
Individual grant recipient$40,000
ST VINCENT DE PAUL$35,000
ST JOHN THE BAPTIST$30,000
GREAT MARRIAGES OF SHEBOYGAN CTY$25,000
WOMEN'S SUPPORT CENTER OF MKE$25,000
PLYMOUTH ARTS CENTER$25,000
ANCHOR OF HOPE$25,000
ST FRANCIS DE SALLES SEMINARY$25,000
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 (FY20–24, $175k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 14% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%PLYMOUTH FOOD PANTRY: $15k → 9%PLYMOUTH FOOD PANTRY: $10k → 9%GREAT MARRIAGES OF SHEBOYGAN CTY: $25k → 9%GREAT MARRIAGES OF SHEBOYGAN CTY: $25k → 9%GREAT MARRIAGES OF SHEBOYGAN: $25k → 9%GREAT MARRIAGES OF SHEBOYGAN: $25k → 9%GREAT MARRIAGES OF SHEBOYGAN CTY: $25k → 9%WOMEN'S SUPPORT CENTER OF MKE: $25k → 17%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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.9M · 29 repeat orgs$413k to everyone else

29 repeat relationships: 22 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

29
9

Total granted

$2.9M
$220k

Still filing today

24%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 76% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $193k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesInternationalReligionFood & NutritionHealthOther
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

  • GM
    GREAT MARRIAGES FOR SHEBOYGAN COUNTY INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $125k · revenue +4%
  • MM
    Mary's Meals USA Inc
    5× · 2020–2024 · $80k · revenue +159%
  • AH
    ANDEAN HEALTH AND DEVELOPMENT INC
    4× · 2020–2023 · $60k · revenue +51%

Funded once

  • CR
    CATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICE
    one grant, 2022 · $75k
  • SC
    SETON CATHOLIC SCHOOLS-MKE
    one grant, 2023 · $50k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2020 · $25k
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
Mothers' Milk Bank of the Western Great Lakes Inc

To provide human milk to improve infant health and save lives.

Health
2
Lake Superior Community Health Center

To improve access to quality health care for all.

Health
3
Midmichigan Health Services

To provide high quality community-oriented, patient-centered health services for all.

Health
4
United Way of Langlade County Inc

United Way uses its global reach and local presence to build stronger, more resilient communities where everyone can thrive. We work to improve the health, education, and economic mobility of every person in every community we serve.

Philanthropy
5
Lutheran Counseling and Family Services

Lutheran counseling and family services of wisconsin provides faith-based mental health counseling, family life education and adoption services.

Human Services
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
Oshkosh Area Community Pantry Inc

The oshkosh area community pantry strives to eliminate food insecurity.

Food & Nutrition
8
Open Your Heart to the Hungry and Homeless

Since 1986, open your heart to the hungry and homeless has worked to ensureevery minnesotan is free from hunger and homelessness. by partnering with organizations serving those in need, we grow donor engagement and raise awareness to…

—
9
Milk With Dignity Standards Council Inc

Monitors compliance with, and enforces , the milk with dignity code of conduct with dairy farms that participate in the program which enlists dairy farms and milk producers to prevent and remedy human rights violations in dairy supply…

Community Improvement
10
United Way of Marquette County

Focusing community resources to meet community needs the United Way of Marquette County works to advance the common good by connecting people with health and human care issues they are concerned about and to provide the oversight the…

—
11
Mercy Health

Mercy Health will provide assistance, support and direction to all of the health care institutions and activities operated and maintained by its Subsidiaries. The mission of Mercy Health in performing these activities shall be to provide a…

—
12
Interfaith Food Pantry of Portage County Inc

The mission is to provide a non denominational food pantry that serves those in need in portage county wisconsin by providing food and other usable household supplies.

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Immaculate Heart Media Inc; the most unlike its peers is Mary's Meals Usa 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

10 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. 10 of the 46 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/10
Grantees still filing
7/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICES: $300,000 · OtherCATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICESROGERS BEHAVIORAL HEALTH: $300,000 · OtherROGERS BEHAVIORAL HEALTHIndividual grant recipient: $200,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientST VINCENT DEPAUL: $175,000 · OtherST VINCENT DEPAULWI RIGHT TO LIFE: $150,000 · OtherWOMENS CARE CENTER: $150,000 · OtherSETON CATHOLIC SCHOOLS- MILWAUKEE: $150,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $141,400 · OtherPLYMOUTH ARTS CENTER: $125,000 · OtherGENERATIONS: $105,000 · OtherWOMENS CARE CENTER MKE: $100,000 · OtherWI RIGHT TO LIFE ED FUND: $100,000 · OtherANCHOR OF HOPE: $100,000 · Other+24 more: $778,456 · Other+24 moreUniversity of Notre Dame du Lac: $1,450,278 · EducationUniversity of Notre Dame du LacGREAT MARRIAGES FOR SHEBOYGAN COUNTY INC: $125,000 · Human ServicesWOMENS SUPPORT CENTERS OF MILWAUKEE INC: $25,000 · Human ServicesPLYMOUTH FOOD PANTRY INC: $25,000 · Human ServicesMary's Meals USA Inc: $80,000 · InternationalANDEAN HEALTH AND DEVELOPMENT INC: $60,000 · InternationalSHEBOYGAN COUNTY FOOD BANK INC: $30,000 · Food & NutritionIMMACULATE HEART MEDIA INC: $30,000 · ReligionLAKESHORE COMMUNITY HEALTH CARE INC: $25,000 · Health
Other$2,874,856Education$1,450,278Human Services$175,000International$140,000Food & Nutrition$30,000Religion$30,000Health$25,000

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 budgetUniversity of Notre Dame du Lac: $1,450,278 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetGREAT MARRIAGES FOR SHEBOYGAN COUNTY INC: $125,000 over 5y, 13% of budgetMary's Meals USA Inc: $80,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetANDEAN HEALTH AND DEVELOPMENT INC: $60,000 over 4y, 1.0% of budgetSHEBOYGAN COUNTY FOOD BANK INC: $30,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetWOMENS SUPPORT CENTERS OF MILWAUKEE INC: $25,000 over 1y, 4.2% of budgetLAKESHORE COMMUNITY HEALTH CARE INC: $25,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetPLYMOUTH FOOD PANTRY INC: $25,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF GREEN COUNTY INC: $20,000 over 2y, 5.2% 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 University of Notre Dame du Lac ↗
  • Who funds GREAT MARRIAGES FOR SHEBOYGAN COUNTY INC ↗
  • Who funds Mary's Meals USA Inc ↗
  • Who funds ANDEAN HEALTH AND DEVELOPMENT INC ↗
  • Who funds SHEBOYGAN COUNTY FOOD BANK INC ↗
  • Who funds IMMACULATE HEART MEDIA INC ↗
  • Who funds WOMENS SUPPORT CENTERS OF MILWAUKEE INC ↗
  • Who funds LAKESHORE COMMUNITY HEALTH CARE INC ↗
  • Who funds PLYMOUTH FOOD PANTRY INC ↗
  • Who funds BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF GREEN COUNTY 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.

The Sartori Family Foundation IncWI13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Sartori Family Foundation Inc · Frank G & Frieda K Brotz Family Foundation Inc · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Lou and Michele Gentine Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Lou and Michele Gentine Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Lou and Michele Gentine Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Lou and Michele Gentine 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 46 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Lou and Michele Gentine’s filings →

    More from the funding graph