· Public charity
Memorial Medical Center Inc
Memorial medical center, inc.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 8 grants below total $99,505 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $222,809 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $123,304 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k4 grants · $27k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $72k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NORTH COAST CYCLING ASSOCIATION INC | $22,000 |
| ASHLAND AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE | $21,500 |
| CITY OF ASHLAND | $14,620 |
| SCHOOL DISTRICT OF ASHLAND | $14,000 |
| NORTHWOOD TECHNICAL COLLEGE-RICE LAKE | $8,535 |
| CHEQUAMEGON AREA MOUNTAIN BIKE ASSOCIATION | $7,000 |
| NAMI LAKE SUPERIOR SOUTH SHORE WI | $6,000 |
| BELLAS MENTORING INC | $5,850 |
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 (FY18–22, $85k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 91% 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.
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 +46% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
12 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 63% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $37k 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
- ELEVERGROW LEARNING CENTER INC2× · 2019–2022 · $255k · revenue +47% · 26% of their budget
- NWNORTHWOODS WOMEN INC2× · 2018–2019 · $62k · revenue +8%
- TBTHE BRICK MINISTRIES INC2× · 2018–2021 · $40k · revenue +46%
Funded once
- BCBAYFIELD COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICESone grant, 2023 · $16k
- CCCORE COMMUNITY RESOURCES INCone grant, 2022 · $15k · revenue -73%
- G1GENESIS 1990 INCORPORATEDone grant, 2023 · $15k
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.
Providing services to the elderly
Economic development in and around ashland nebraska.
Operation of a historical tourist attraction
Area recreational facility
Working towards the revitalization of downtown Green Lake.
To improve the quality of life in the ashland area, through, but not limited to the promotion, encouragement and support of education, health and well-being of families & individuals, preservation of nature, history, and the promotion of…
Realty regulation
Sober living
To provide shelter to the homeless community in merrill wi
Services to the elderly
Positively affect the health and wellness of the community of lake mills, wisconsin through quality programming and activities
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ashland Area Development Corp and the most unlike its peers is Historic Civic Center Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 19 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 17% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund close more than the field — 10% lost their exemption, against 9% 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.
18 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. 18 of the 31 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 EVERGROW LEARNING CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds NORTHWOODS WOMEN INC ↗
- Who funds ASHLAND AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ↗
- Who funds THE BRICK MINISTRIES INC ↗
- Who funds CHEQUAMEGON AREA MOUNTAIN BIKE ASSOCIATI ↗
- Who funds ASHLAND AREA DEVELOPMENT CORP ↗
- Who funds NORTHLAND COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds CORE COMMUNITY RESOURCES INC ↗
- Who funds GENESIS 1990 INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds Bellas Mentoring Inc ↗
- Who funds PARTNERS OF MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE APOSTLE ISLANDS NATIONAL LAKESHORE INC ↗
- Who funds HISTORIC CIVIC CENTER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds RECREATION & FITNESS RESOURCES INC ↗
- Who funds DAVE GALLUP FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds NAMI LAKE SUPERIOR SOUTH SHORE WI INC ↗
- Who funds ASHLAND ORE DOCK CHARITABLE TRUST ↗
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: Duluth-Superior Area Community Foundation · Otto Bremer Trust · Regional Wellness Fund of Memorial Medical Center Inc · Smdc Medical Center · Hrk Foundation · Xcel Energy Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Memorial Medical Center Inc 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.