· Private foundation
Marguerite Listeman Fund
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 FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k12 grants · $30k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $57k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $116k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Individual grant recipient | $65,500 |
| HIGHGROUND | $50,000 |
| NEILLSVILLE YOUTH BASEBALL | $20,000 |
| NEILLSVILLE AMERICAN LEGION POST 73 | $17,000 |
| CHRISTMAS ANGEL PROJECT | $10,000 |
| NEILLSVILLE IMPROVEMENT CORP | $10,000 |
| WARRIOR BOOSTER CLUB | $6,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| SPECIAL OLYMPICS WISCONSIN | $3,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $3,000 |
| UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST | $3,000 |
| TRACTORS FOR AUTISM & DISABILITIES | $2,000 |
| NEILLSVILLE AREA PLAYERS | $2,000 |
| CLARK COUNTY JAIL MUSEUM | $2,000 |
| CLARK COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT | $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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY19–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of your 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.
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 +69% since the first grant, against +32% for the ones you funded once.
19 repeat relationships — 11 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 7 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, 76% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $49k 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
- MCMARSHFIELD CLINIC HEALTH SYSTEM INC3× · 2020–2022 · $150k · revenue +442%
- ALAmerican Legion Post 734× · 2019–2023 · $75k · revenue +69%
SPECIAL OLYMPICS WISCONSIN INC5× · 2020–2024 · $15k · revenue +48%
Funded once
- MMMEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER INCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $50k · revenue +77%
- NANEILLSVILLE AMERICAN LEGION 73one grant, 2020 · $30k
- NSNEILLSVILLE SENIOR CENTERone grant, 2021 · $11k
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.
Promote economic development in jefferson wi for its members
Ellsworth county economic development is improving the lives of citizens of ellsworth county through recruitment, retention, and expansion of goods and services offered in ellsworth county.
The northwest wisconsin workforce investment board (nwwib) will create, and continue to improve, an innovative and quality strategic direction for the regional workforce development system.
Eagles Nest Projects Wisconsin is a nonprofit educational organization whose primary purpose is to inspire and educate youth through hands-on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) programs focused on aviation. The…
Promote and develop economic expansion in duluth and northeastern mn and northwestern wisconsin. the organization leads regional research efforts related to human resources, and emerging industries to inform business development and…
To provide economic development services including business recruitment, expansion, business financing, community and workforce development.
Together we are dedicated to improve the health and wellness of all generations through high quality, compassionate, and patient-centered care.
To promote economic development in boone county.
The mission of wisconsin economic development association, inc. is to enhance economic development in wisconsin through professional development, networking, and advocacy.
The mission of the center for healthcare careers of southeast wisconsin, inc. (chcsew) is to unite all appropriate stakeholders in a viable, flexible structure to locate, educate and support a workforce from service to professional levels…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Marshfield Clinic Health System Inc and the most unlike its peers is American Legion Post 73. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
9 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. 9 of the 60 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.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Marguerite Listeman Fund 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 Marguerite Listeman Fund?
Find your warmest path to Marguerite Listeman Fund 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.