Skip to content
Memorial Medical Center Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Memorial Medical Center Inc

Memorial medical center, inc.

$223k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$22k
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 2025.

Human Services$376kRecreation & Sports$120kEducation$89kCommunity Improvement$83kHealth$49kPublic Benefit$45kFood & Nutrition$40kCrime & Legal$16kOther$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 8 grants below total $99,505, the rows itemized in this filing. The $222,809 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $123,304 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $27k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $72k
$14,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$292M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
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
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 (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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%DAVE GALLUP FOUNDATION INC: $8k → 8%NEW DAY ADVOCACY CENTER: $35k → 14%NEW DAY ADVOCACY CENTER: $27k → 14%CORE COMMUNITY RESOURCES: $15k → 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.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$663k · 12 repeat orgs$205k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +46% since the first grant, against 0% for those 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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
16

Total granted

$663k
$169k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+46%
0%

Still filing today

58%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 63% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $37k 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
Human ServicesCommunity ImprovementRecreation & SportsHealthFood & NutritionPhilanthropyOther
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

  • EL
    EVERGROW LEARNING CENTER INC
    2× · 2019–2022 · $255k · revenue +47% · 26% of their budget
  • NW
    NORTHWOODS WOMEN INC
    2× · 2018–2019 · $62k · revenue +8%
  • TB
    THE BRICK MINISTRIES INC
    2× · 2018–2021 · $40k · revenue +46%

Funded once

  • BC
    BAYFIELD COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
    one grant, 2023 · $16k
  • CC
    CORE COMMUNITY RESOURCES INC
    one grant, 2022 · $15k · revenue -73%
  • G1
    GENESIS 1990 INCORPORATED
    one grant, 2023 · $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
Ashland Senior Community Centerinc

Providing services to the elderly

Community Improvement
2
Ashland Area Economic Development Corporation

Economic development in and around ashland nebraska.

Community Improvement
3
Ashland Community Enterprises

Operation of a historical tourist attraction

Arts & Culture
4
North Country Community Recreation Center Inc

Area recreational facility

Recreation & Sports
5
North Lake Wellness Center
—
6
Green Lake Renewal Inc

Working towards the revitalization of downtown Green Lake.

Community Improvement
7
Ashland Board of Realtors Inc

Realty regulation

—
8
Ashland Community Foundation

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…

Philanthropy
9
North County Sober Living

Sober living

Crime & Legal
10
Merrill Community Homeless Center Inc

To provide shelter to the homeless community in merrill wi

Housing & Shelter
11
Ashland County Aging Unit

Services to the elderly

Human Services
12
The Northeast Wisconsin Masonic Library and Museum Inc
Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Nami Lake Superior South Shore Wi Inc; 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.
04the grantee network

18 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. 18 of the 31 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/18
Grantees still filing
9/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

EVERGROW LEARNING CENTER INC: $254,700 · OtherEVERGROW LEARNING CENTER INCASHLAND CARES: $60,000 · OtherASHLAND CARESASHLAND AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $58,000 · OtherASHLAND AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCEASHLAND SCHOOL DISTRICT: $45,000 · OtherASHLAND SCHOOL DISTRICTCITY OF ASHLAND: $30,338 · OtherASHLAND SKI TRAIL ASSOCIATION INC: $25,000 · OtherNORTH COAST CYCLING ASSOCIATION INC: $22,000 · Other+13 more: $135,665 · Other+13 moreNORTHWOODS WOMEN INC: $61,700 · Human ServicesNORTHWOODS …CORE COMMUNITY RESOURCES INC: $15,000 · Human ServicesCORE COMMUN…DAVE GALLUP FOUNDATION INC: $8,000 · Human ServicesDAVE GALLUP…THE BRICK MINISTRIES INC: $40,000 · Food & NutritionCHEQUAMEGON AREA MOUNTAIN BIKE ASSOCIATI: $27,000 · Recreation & SportsRECREATION & FITNESS RESOURCES INC: $10,000 · Recreation & SportsASHLAND AREA DEVELOPMENT CORP: $25,000 · Community ImprovementHISTORIC CIVIC CENTER FOUNDATION: $10,000 · Community ImprovementNORTHLAND COLLEGE: $25,000 · EducationMEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER INC: $10,000 · HealthNAMI LAKE SUPERIOR SOUTH SHORE WI INC: $6,000 · Health
Other$630,703Human Services$84,700Food & Nutrition$40,000Recreation & Sports$37,000Community Improvement$35,000Education$25,000Health$16,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetEVERGROW LEARNING CENTER INC: $254,700 over 2y, 26% of budgetNORTHWOODS WOMEN INC: $61,700 over 2y, 3.5% of budgetASHLAND AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $58,000 over 3y, 2.5% of budgetTHE BRICK MINISTRIES INC: $40,000 over 2y, 3.5% of budgetNORTHLAND COLLEGE: $25,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetASHLAND AREA DEVELOPMENT CORP: $25,000 over 2y, 3.0% of budgetCORE COMMUNITY RESOURCES INC: $15,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetBellas Mentoring Inc: $11,250 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE APOSTLE ISLANDS NATIONAL LAKESHORE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetPARTNERS OF MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER: $10,000 over 1y, 5.0% of budgetMEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHISTORIC CIVIC CENTER FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 7.3% of budgetRECREATION & FITNESS RESOURCES INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetDAVE GALLUP FOUNDATION INC: $8,000 over 1y, 5.2% of budgetASHLAND ORE DOCK CHARITABLE TRUST: $5,000 over 1y, 9.0% 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.

Duluth-Superior Area …Otto Bremer TrustRegional Wellness Fun…Smdc Medical CenterHrk FoundationXcel Energy FoundationVanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Duluth-Superior Area Community FoundationMN30.1× affinity12 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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 Memorial Medical Center Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Memorial Medical Center Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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 31 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Memorial Medical Center’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