Skip to content
Marshfield Clinic Health System Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Marshfield Clinic Health System Inc

We enrich lives to create healthy communities through accessible, affordable, compassionate health care.

$668k
Granted FY2023
37
Grants FY2023
2
States reached
$80k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2023.

Philanthropy$922kPublic Benefit$382kHuman Services$358kArts & Culture$200kRecreation & Sports$170kEducation$125kHealth$78kPublic Safety & Disaster$73kOther$0
02FY2023 · 37 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 37 grants below total $496,476, the rows itemized in this filing. The $667,534 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $171,058 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k9 grants · $71k
  • $10k–50k27 grants · $346k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $80k
$10,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$711M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MARSHFIELD AREA UNITED WAY$80,000
UNITED WAY OF MARATHON COUNTY$39,513
MARSHFIELD AREA YMCA$25,000
UNITED WAY OF GREATER CHIPPEWA VALLEY$25,000
VILAS COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORP$20,000
TOWN OF BOULDER JUNCTION$15,000
MARATHON COUNTY HEALTH DEPT$11,000
MARSHFIELD AREA CHAMBER FOUNDATION$10,025
NTEC$10,000
BENJAMIN'S EMERGENCY SHELTER$10,000
CHILDCARING INC$10,000
GOOD NEWS PROJECT INC$10,000
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF WAUSAU WI$10,000
EMBRACE SERVICES INC$10,000
RUSK COUNTY TRANSIT COMMISSION$10,000
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 (FY23–23, $30k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 67% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%EMBRACE SERVICES INC: $10k → 13%CAP SERVICES INC: $10k → 10%HOLA INC: $10k → 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.

53%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.3M · 19 repeat orgs$1.2M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +11% since the first grant, against +10% for those funded once.

19 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2023, 7 since wound down; 23 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
27

Total granted

$1.3M
$964k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+11%
+10%

Still filing today

63%
41%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 53% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $235k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
PhilanthropyHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementYouth DevelopmentRecreation & SportsEmploymentOther
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

  • MA
    MARSHFIELD AREA UNITED WAY
    5× · 2017–2023 · $473k · revenue +12%
  • UW
    UNITED WAY OF MARATHON COUNTY INC
    6× · 2017–2023 · $171k · revenue +4%
  • SV
    ST VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT STORE INC
    2× · 2017–2019 · $70k · revenue +106%

Funded once

  • CO
    CITY OF MARSHFIELD
    one grant, 2018 · $250k
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN
    one grant, 2019 · $200k
  • RL
    RICE LAKE AQUATICS AND RECREATIONAL CENTER INC
    one grant, 2022 · $100k · revenue +10%
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
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
2
United Way of Wisconsin Inc

United way of wisconsin is dedicated to supporting and enriching a strong statewide united way network that maximizes the capacity of local united ways to address human needs, improve lives and create lasting positive change across…

Philanthropy
3
United Way Manitowoc County Inc

United way's mission is to improve lives.

Philanthropy
4
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…

—
5
Kishwaukee United Way

To improve lives by sharing community resources

Philanthropy
6
United Way of Clinton County Iowa

To provide leadership in our communities to 1) identify our most pressing human care needs, 2) to work together to direct the time, energy and resources towards addressing those needs to improve our quality of life.

—
7
Reedsburg Area Medical Center

Reedsburg area medical center, always there, going beyond the expected to provide compassionate, quality, and efficient health care.

Health
8
Northwest Wisconsin Community Services Agency Inc

To improve the quality of life by providing resources and services within our communities.

Human Services
9
United Way of North Central Iowa

Seeking to build a stronger, more caring community by forming partnerships with businesses, community experts, education & health & human service agencies to achieve targeted outcomes & sustained changes in community conditions which will…

Philanthropy
10
Midwest Dairy Association

Midwest dairy works with others to give consumers an excellent dairy experience increasing sales, fostering innovation, and inspiring consumer confidence of dairy products and practices.

—
11
Barry County United Way

None

Philanthropy
12
United Way of the Midlands

United way of the midlands mission is "we unite our community's caring spirit to build a stronger tomorrow".

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is United Way of the Greater Chippewa Valley Inc; the most unlike its peers is Hola 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

38 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. 38 of the 70 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
38/38
Grantees still filing
25/38
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CITY OF MARSHFIELD: $250,000 · OtherCITY OF MARSHFIELDUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN: $200,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSINMARSHFIELD AREA YMCA INC: $157,500 · OtherMARSHFIELD AREA YMCA INCCOLUMBUS CATHOLIC SCHOOLS INC: $81,550 · OtherCOLUMBUS CATHOLIC SCHOOLS INCST VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT STORE INC: $69,600 · OtherUNITED WAY OF PORTAGE COUNTY INC: $52,500 · Other+45 more: $652,912 · Other+45 moreMARSHFIELD AREA UNITED WAY: $473,000 · PhilanthropyMARSHFIELD AREA UNITED WAYUNITED WAY OF MARATHON COUNTY INC: $170,964 · PhilanthropyUNITED WAY OF MARATHON COUNTY INCUNITED WAY OF THE GREATER CHIPPEWA VALLEY INC: $85,000 · PhilanthropyUNITED WAY OF THE GREATER CHIPPEWA VA…NORTHWOODS UNITED WAY: $40,000 · PhilanthropyUNITED WAY OF DODGE COUNTY INC: $30,000 · Philanthropy+3 more: $40,025 · PhilanthropyRICE LAKE AQUATICS AND RECREATIONAL CENTER INC: $100,000 · Recreation & SportsCENTRAL WISCONSIN STATE FAIR: $13,936 · Recreation & SportsAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $20,000 · Human ServicesEMBRACE SERVICES INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesHOLA INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesCAP SERVICES INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesTEXAS MEDICAL ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION: $25,000 · Community ImprovementVILAS COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPOR: $20,000 · Community ImprovementBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF THE GREATER CHIPPEWA VALLEY INC: $14,000 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF THE WAUSAU AREA INC: $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentMEDICAL CARE ACCESS COALITION OF DICKINSON / IRON COUNTIES INC: $10,000 · Health
Other$1,464,062Philanthropy$838,989Recreation & Sports$113,936Human Services$50,000Community Improvement$45,000Youth Development$24,000Health$10,000

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 budgetMARSHFIELD AREA UNITED WAY: $473,000 over 5y, 15% of budgetUNITED WAY OF MARATHON COUNTY INC: $170,964 over 6y, 1.2% of budgetMARSHFIELD AREA YMCA INC: $157,500 over 6y, 1.2% of budgetRICE LAKE AQUATICS AND RECREATIONAL CENTER INC: $100,000 over 1y, 22% of budgetUNITED WAY OF THE GREATER CHIPPEWA VALLEY INC: $85,000 over 5y, 1.5% of budgetST VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT STORE INC: $69,600 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetUNITED WAY OF PORTAGE COUNTY INC: $52,500 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetNORTHWOODS UNITED WAY: $40,000 over 2y, 14% of budgetUNITED WAY OF DODGE COUNTY INC: $30,000 over 3y, 5.5% of budgetFEED MY PEOPLE INC: $25,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetBIG BROTHERS AND BIG SISTERS OF METRO MILWAUKEE: $25,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetVILAS COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPOR: $20,000 over 1y, 8.2% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetUNITED WAY OF RICE LAKE INC: $20,000 over 2y, 12% of budgetMARSHFIELD ROTARY FOUNDATION INC: $20,000 over 1y, 33% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF THE GREATER CHIPPEWA VALLEY INC: $14,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetCENTRAL WISCONSIN STATE FAIR: $13,936 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetMARSHFIELD AREA CHAMBER FOUNDATION INC: $10,025 over 1y, 4.5% of budgetCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF CENTRAL WISCONSIN INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMEDICAL CARE ACCESS COALITION OF DICKINSON / IRON COUNTIES INC: $10,000 over 1y, 6.0% of budgetNelson Communications Cooperative: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBENJAMIN'S HOUSE EMERGENCY SHELTER INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetEMBRACE SERVICES INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetCHILDCARING INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetRHINELANDER AREA FOOD PANTRY INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF THE WAUSAU AREA INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCAP SERVICES INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGOOD NEWS PROJECT INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetNORTHWEST WISCONSIN CONCENTRATED EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM INC: $7,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCHIPPEWA VALLEY TECHNICAL COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC: $7,500 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetMARSHFIELD YOUTH HOCKEY ASSOCIATION INC: $7,500 over 1y, 4.5% of budgetBOYSCOUTS OF AMERICA 627 SAMOSET COUNCIL: $5,150 over 1y, 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.

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.

Green Bay Packers Fou…Herbert H Kohl Charit…Greater Wisconsin Age…Mayo Clinic Group Ret…Community Foundation …Marshfield Clinic IncSecurity Health Plan …Eau Claire Community …Greater Green Bay Com…Xcel Energy FoundationAbc Foundation Charit…Otto Bremer Trust
Green Bay Packers FoundationWI29.2× affinity14 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Green Bay Packers Foundation · Herbert H Kohl Charities Inc · Greater Wisconsin Agency on Aging Resources Inc · Mayo Clinic Group Return · Community Foundation of North Central Wisconsin Inc · Marshfield Clinic Inc · Security Health Plan of Wisconsin Inc · Eau Claire Community Foundation · Greater Green Bay Community Foundation Inc · Xcel Energy Foundation · Abc Foundation Charitable Trust · Otto Bremer Trust

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 Marshfield Clinic Health System Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Marshfield Clinic Health System Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    17report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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 70 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports $70k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2023, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Marshfield Clinic Health System’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