· Public charity
Michael Fields Agricultural Institute Inc
Michael fields agricultural institute's mission is to help rural and urban farms and agricultural communities in wisconsin and beyond be healthy environmentally, economically, and socially.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2022–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 9 grants below total $534,373 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $733,198 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $198,825 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 · FY2024
- Under $10k1 grant · $9k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $121k
- $50k–250k4 grants · $404k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| WISCONSIN FARMERS UNION FOUNDATION | $107,629 |
| RENEWING THE COUNTRYSIDE | $104,143 |
| BOARD OF REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SYSTEM | $100,586 |
| GLOBAL PHILANTHROPHY PARTNERSHIP | $91,390 |
| MARBLESEED | $41,769 |
| NEIGHBORHOOD FOOD SOLUTIONS | $35,480 |
| MOTHERLAND GARDENS COMMUNITY PROJECT | $27,346 |
| REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA | $16,815 |
| GROUNDSWELL CONSERVANCY INC | $9,215 |
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 (FY23–24, $46k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% 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 +105% since the first grant, against -8% for the ones you funded once.
9 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 2 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, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $117k 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
- RTRENEWING THE COUNTRYSIDE3× · 2022–2024 · $263k · revenue +167%
- WFWISCONSIN FARMERS UNION FOUNDATION2× · 2023–2024 · $206k · revenue +114%
- GPGLOBAL PHILANTHROPY PARTNERSHIP3× · 2022–2024 · $197k · revenue +105%
Funded once
- UMUW MADISONone grant, 2023 · $150k
- WFWISCONSIN FARMER'S UNIONone grant, 2022 · $51k
- UMUW MADISON CENTER FOR INTEGRATED AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMSone grant, 2023 · $41k
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.
Support the development and enhancement of sustainable farming systems through farmer-to-farmer networking, innovation, demonstration, and education.
The purpose of this corporation is to promote the connections between agriculture, the environment, and rural communities in order to improve ecological health, economic viability, and rural vitality.
Saves the land that sustains us by protecting farmland, promoting sound farming practices, and keeping farmers on the land.
To combat food insecurity today and tomorrow by growing food and farmers.
Catalyze collaboration across perspectives, power, and systems for social equity and environmental health.
He fondy food center connects greater milwaukee to local, fresh food- from farm to market to table - so that children learn better, adults live healthier, and communities celebrate cultural food traditions.
Advancing sustainability in the western area of the united states through a series of programs and activities designed to promote better ranching practices. a strong focus is to provide ranchers with the information, tools, technical…
Frogtown Farm is an urban farm with a mission to enrich the world by cultivating soil and community in Frogtown. The farm is built upon values of justice for people and the planet, connection within and across communities, resilience with…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Global Philanthropy Partnership and the most unlike its peers is Latino Economic Development Center. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
8 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. 8 of the 20 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 RENEWING THE COUNTRYSIDE ↗
- Who funds WISCONSIN FARMERS UNION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL PHILANTHROPY PARTNERSHIP ↗
- Who funds MARBLESEED INC ↗
- Who funds THE MOTHERLAND GARDENS COMMUNITY PROJECT ↗
- Who funds GROUNDSWELL CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds Latino Economic Development Center ↗
- Who funds ADVOCATES FOR URBAN AGRICULTURE NFP ↗
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: The McKnight Foundation · Bradshaw-Knight Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Michael Fields Agricultural Institute 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.