Skip to content

· Private foundation

Mark and Muriel Wexler Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$305k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$68k
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, FY2017 to 2025.

Health$1.1MPhilanthropy$640kFood & Nutrition$420kHuman Services$230kEducation$190kCivil Rights$183kEnvironment$35kArts & Culture$15k
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $168k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $133k
$30,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$6.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MINNESOTA$67,500
SECOND HARVEST HEARTLAND$65,000
GREATER TWIN CITIES UNITED WAY$45,000
NAMI MINNESOTA$32,500
NATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY UPPER MIDWEST CHAPTER$30,000
JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICE OF MINNEAPOLIS$30,000
FRIENDS OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER$20,000
MINNEAPOLIS JEWISH FEDERATION$10,000
ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE UPPER MIDWEST$5,000
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 (FY17–25, $230k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICE: $45k → 11%JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICE: $30k → 11%JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICE: $30k → 11%JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICE: $25k → 11%JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICE: $25k → 11%JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICE: $20k → 11%JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICE OF MINNEAPOLIS: $30k → 11%JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICE OF MINNEAPOLIS: $25k → 11%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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.5M · 16 repeat orgs$30k to everyone else

16 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
2

Total granted

$2.5M
$30k

Still filing today

63%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Civil RightsPhilanthropyHealthHuman ServicesEducationFood & NutritionOther
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

  • PP
    PLANNED PARENTHOOD MINNESOTA NORTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA
    9× · 2017–2025 · $348k · revenue +1%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION
    7× · 2017–2024 · $190k · revenue +105%
  • AL
    ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE
    7× · 2017–2023 · $135k · revenue +78%

Funded once

  • PN
    PAUL NEWMAN ROUND UP RIVER RANCH
    one grant, 2018 · $15k
  • PN
    PAUL NEWMAN ROUND UP RIVER
    one grant, 2017 · $15k
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
Minnesota Medical Association

To be the leading voice of medicine to make minnesota the healthiest state and the best place to practice.

—
2
Minnesota Business Partnership

The minnesota business partnership's mission is to maintain a high quality of life for all minnesotans by ensuring that the state's economy remains strong, globally competitive and its prospects for growth bright by working with elected…

—
3
Leadership Matters Mn

Leadership matters mn is focused on advancing a policy agenda that places working minnesotans first. we support economic growth, job creation and equitable tax and education policies that will allow every minnesotan to thrive.

Education
4
Citizens League

The citizens league is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that empowers people to engage in civic life and public policy, to make minnesota a better place to live and work for everyone.

—
5
Minnesota Chamber of Commerce and Industry

The minnesota chamber of commerce proactively leads the business community statewide to: advance pro-business, responsible minnesota public policy that creates jobs and grows the econony; provde member services to address evolving business…

—
6
Mentoring Partnership of Minnesota

Mentoring partnership of minnesota (mpm) builds and elevates the capacity of programs, systems and policies to strengthen youth mentoring relationships. strategic priorities include: 1. support a statewide mentoring partner network2.…

Employment
7
Minnesota Council on Foundations

MCF is a vibrant philanthropic community connecting, strengthening and mobilizing the power of philanthropy to advance prosperity and equity.

—
8
Mn Community Measurement

Mn community measurement empowers stakeholders with meaningful information to drive improvement.

Health
9
Twin Cities Diversity in Practice

To attract, recruit, advance, and retain attorneys of color in the twin cities through education and collaboration with member organizations.

Community Improvement
10
Institute for Agriculture & Trade Policy

Iatp works locally and globally at the intersection of policy and practice to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.

Food & Nutrition
11
Alliance for Metropolitan Stability

The alliance is a coalition of community-based organizations and advocacy groups with a mission to build power across the intersections of geography, race, culture, and issues in the twin cities region to eliminate systems of oppression…

Community Improvement
12
Minneapolis Federation of Teachers Local 59

We exist to ensure that all students learn. we support their growth into knowledgeable, skilled, and confident citizens capable of succeeding in their work, personal, and family lives into the 21st century. mft represents its membership,…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Greater Twin Cities United Way; the most unlike its peers is Coalition of Asian American Leaders. 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

11 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. 11 of the 19 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)
11/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

IMMUNIZATION ACTION AND HEPATITIS B COALITION: $350,000 · OtherIMMUNIZATION ACTION AND HEPATITIS B COALITIO…SECOND HARVEST: $280,000 · OtherSECOND HARVESTNAMI: $140,000 · OtherNAMINATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY: $100,000 · OtherNATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETYNAMI MINNESOTA: $57,500 · OtherNATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY UPPER MIDWEST CHAPTER: $55,000 · Other+5 more: $100,000 · Other+5 moreGREATER TWIN CITIES UNITED WAY: $452,500 · PhilanthropyGREATER TWIN CITIES UNITED…MINNEAPOLIS JEWISH FEDERATION: $187,500 · PhilanthropyMINNEAPOLIS JEWISH FEDERAT…PLANNED PARENTHOOD MINNESOTA NORTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA: $347,500 · HealthPLANNED PARENT…JEWISH FAMILY AND CHILDREN'S SERVICE OF MINNEAPOLIS: $230,000 · Human ServicesJEWISH FA…UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION: $190,000 · EducationANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $135,000 · Civil RightsNATIONAL KOREAN AMERICAN SERVICE AND EDUCATION CONSORTIUM INC: $12,500 · Civil RightsSECOND HARVEST HEARTLAND: $125,000 · Food & Nutrition
Other$1,082,500Philanthropy$640,000Health$347,500Human Services$230,000Education$190,000Civil Rights$147,500Food & Nutrition$125,000

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 budgetGREATER TWIN CITIES UNITED WAY: $452,500 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD MINNESOTA NORTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA: $347,500 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY AND CHILDREN'S SERVICE OF MINNEAPOLIS: $230,000 over 8y, 0.3% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION: $190,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetMINNEAPOLIS JEWISH FEDERATION: $187,500 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $135,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetSECOND HARVEST HEARTLAND: $125,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNAMI MINNESOTA: $57,500 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER: $35,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetNATIONAL KOREAN AMERICAN SERVICE AND EDUCATION CONSORTIUM INC: $12,500 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetCoalition of Asian American Leaders: $10,000 over 2y, 0.2% 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 GREATER TWIN CITIES UNITED WAY ↗
  • Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD MINNESOTA NORTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH FAMILY AND CHILDREN'S SERVICE OF MINNEAPOLIS ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds MINNEAPOLIS JEWISH FEDERATION ↗
  • Who funds ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE ↗
  • Who funds SECOND HARVEST HEARTLAND ↗
  • Who funds NAMI MINNESOTA ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL KOREAN AMERICAN SERVICE AND EDUCATION CONSORTIUM INC ↗
  • Who funds Coalition of Asian American Leaders ↗

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.

Saint Paul & Minnesota FoundationMN13.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Saint Paul & Minnesota Foundation · The Minneapolis Foundation · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · 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 Mark and Muriel Wexler Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Mark and Muriel Wexler Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%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
    0get no government money at all
    5report 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Mark and Muriel Wexler Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Mark and Muriel Wexler 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.

    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 19 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Mark and Muriel Wexler’s filings →

    More from the funding graph