· Private foundation
Lumw Foundation
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k57 grants · $58k
- $10k–50k10 grants · $271k
- $50k–250k4 grants · $373k
- $250k+2 grants · $2.6M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| FRIENDS OF GENESEE THEATRE | $1,905,500 |
| ST JOSEPH CATHOLIC ACADEMY | $650,904 |
| JO DAVIESS CONSERVATION FOUNDATION | $150,000 |
| FRIENDS OF LAKE FOREST PARKS AND RECREATION | $100,000 |
| TOWN OF MANITOWISH WATERS | $72,453 |
| CITY OF LAKE FOREST ELAWA | $50,370 |
| ST ANASTASIA | $40,000 |
| MANITOWISH WATERS BIKE TRAIL INC | $37,873 |
| NORTH LAKELAND SCHOOL DISTRICT | $36,432 |
| ICE AGE TRAIL ALLIANCE | $30,000 |
| SENO KRLT CONSERVANCY | $27,439 |
| NORTH LAKELAND DISCOVERY CENTER | $27,361 |
| Individual grant recipient | $26,953 |
| UNIVERSITY OF WI FOUNDATION CROWE | $25,000 |
| MATTHIAS ACADEMY | $10,000 |
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 (FY21–24, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 68% 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 +23% since the first grant, against +22% for the ones you funded once.
65 repeat relationships — 59 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 13 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $172k 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
- JDJO DAVIESS CONSERVATION FOUNDATION INC2× · 2021–2024 · $160k · revenue +69%
- IAICE AGE TRAIL ALLIANCE INC3× · 2021–2024 · $80k · revenue +40%
- SKSENO KRLT CONSERVANCY INC3× · 2021–2024 · $57k · revenue +104%
Funded once
- SSEEone grant, 2020 · $3.8M
- NCNATURE CONSERVANCY - WIone grant, 2021 · $30k
- TETaxpayer Education Foundationone grant, 2021 · $20k · revenue 0% · 32% of their budget
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.
To protect wisconsin's lands, waters, and wildlife by providing funding, leading partnerships, and connecting all people with nature.
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.
Lincoln park zoo is dedicated to connecting people with nature by providing a free, family-oriented wildlife experience in the heart of chicago and by advancing the highest quality of animal care, horticulture, education, science and…
To sustain, restore, and enhance the nation's fish, wildlife, plants, and habitats.
This member-supported organization protects and restores iowa's land, water and wildlife for future generations. priorities include permanent land protection, promotion of improved land management and bringing new conservation…
To protect, conserve, and enhance wisconsin's natural resources by advocating for and supporting county conservation efforts, for current and future generations.
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…
Eastern national promotes the public's understanding and support of america's national parks and other public trust partners by providing quality educational experiences, products and services.
The minnesota land trust protects and restores minnesota's most vital natural lands in order to provide wildlife habitat, clean water, outdoor experiences and scenic beauty for generations to come.
The organization's mission is to conserve and promote new england's native plants to ensure healthy, biologically diverse landscapes.
The door county land trust is a local, non-governmental non-profit organization whose mission is to preserve door county's exceptional lands and waters forever.
The glacier national park conservancy works to preserve and protect glacier national park for future generations.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Aldo Leopold Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Leigh Yawkey Woodson Art Museum Inc. 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 42 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 12% 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.
68 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. 68 of the 99 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 BOULDER JUNCTION COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds MANITOWISH WATERS BIKE TRAIL INC ↗
- Who funds JO DAVIESS CONSERVATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF LAKE FOREST PARKS & REC FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ICE AGE TRAIL ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds NORTH LAKELAND DISCOVERY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds SENO KRLT CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds THE MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN INC ↗
- Who funds Bong Naturalist Association Inc ↗
- Who funds MATTHIAS ACADEMY CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds Taxpayer Education Foundation ↗
- Who funds NICOLET COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CAMPANILE CENTER FOR THE ARTS INC ↗
- Who funds THE WOMAN'S BOARD OF NORTHWESTERN MEMORIAL HOSPITAL ↗
- Who funds ROOT-PIKE WATERSHED INITIATIVE NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds North Chicago Community Partners ↗
- Who funds MARSHFIELD CLINIC INC ↗
- Who funds HOWARD YOUNG FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL MUSEUM OF WILDLIFE ART OF THE UNITED STATES ↗
- Who funds GENEVA LAKE CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds FIRST STAGE MILWAUKEE ↗
- Who funds LAKE BLUFF OPEN LANDS ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds THE MORTON ARBORETUM ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds LITTLE STAR FOUNDATION 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.
Open a dossier: Incrediblebank Foundation Inc · Community Foundation of North Central Wisconsin Inc · The Chicago Community Trust · Herbert H Kohl Charities Inc · Pukall Lumber Foundation Inc · Green Bay Packers Foundation · Butler Family Foundation · Baird Foundation Inc · AbbVie Foundation · Duane and Kathleen Foulkes Foundation Inc · Red Bird Hollow Foundation · Sunshine Charitable 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 Lumw 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.
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 Lumw Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Lumw 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.