· Private foundation
Mutschler Family Foundation Inc
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
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.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k37 grants · $42k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $35k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CLCFFOX HILL NATURE PRESERVE | $25,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $7,500 |
| KIDS MATTER INC | $3,000 |
| BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF GREATER MILWAUKEE | $3,000 |
| RIVEREDGE NATURE CENTER | $2,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,500 |
| FRIENDS OF BAXTER STATE PARK | $2,500 |
| SOUTHEAST LAND TRUST | $2,500 |
| BEST BUDDIES | $2,000 |
| GIRLS ON THE RUN MAINE | $1,500 |
| A SAFE PLACE | $1,500 |
| MILTON ACADEMY | $1,000 |
| KAWASIWAJO COMMUNITY LAND TRUST | $1,000 |
| CAPE ELIZABETH LAND TRUST | $1,000 |
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 (FY17–25, $14k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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 +37% since the first grant, against +8% for the ones you funded once.
57 repeat relationships — 22 still active in FY2025, 35 since wound down; 11 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, 68% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $21k 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
THE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MILWAUKEE CORPORATION7× · 2017–2023 · $98k · revenue +39%
CEDAR LAKES CONSERVATION FOUNDATION INC6× · 2017–2022 · $81k · revenue +91%- LPLAKE PARK FRIENDS LTD9× · 2017–2025 · $25k · revenue +172%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2024 · $8k
- USUniv School of Milw Soccer Fundone grant, 2022 · $5k
CLEAN WISCONSIN INCone grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue 0%
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.
Our mission is conserving West Michigans ecologically critical land. We protect land by creating public nature preserves, providing support to communities and local governments in creating natural areas, and helping private landowners…
Landmark conservancy is a nationally accredited, nonprofit conservation organization serving 20 counties across northwest wisconsin. their mission is to conserve wisconsin's natural legacy for everyone...forever.
To protect, conserve, and enhance wisconsin's natural resources by advocating for and supporting county conservation efforts, for current and future generations.
To protect wisconsin's lands, waters, and wildlife by providing funding, leading partnerships, and connecting all people with nature.
The minnesota land trust protects and restores minnesota's most vital natural lands in order to provide wildlife habitat, clean water, outdoor experiences and scenic beauty for generations to come.
Glacial Lakes Conservancy, as a land trust, is a nonprofit organization that, as part of its mission, actively works to conserve land by undertaking or assisting in land or conservation easement acquisitions.
The wildlands trust works throughout southeastern massachusetts to conserve and permanently protect native habitats, farmland, and lands of high ecologic and scenic value that serve to keep our communities healthy and our residents…
Engage our community in supporting milwaukee county parks to collectively steward a thriving park system.
Milwaukee water commons is helping catalyze milwaukee as a true model water city-a place where we all have a stake in the health of our waters and all share in their stewardship and benefits. we are advancing our community envisioned water…
Milwaukee women inc is an organization of executives determined to change the quality and composition of corporate boards to maximize the performance of public and private companies with a focus on women and women of color.
Be and create stewards for the water environment of michigan. provide high quality education for michigan's water professionals. educate and inform policy makers and the general public. promote scientifically sound environmental practices…
The mission of the milwaukee bar association is to be an inclusive, equitable and diverse organization that serves the interests of the lawyers, judges and the people of milwaukee county by working to promote the professional interests of…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mississippi Valley Conservancy Inc and the most unlike its peers is National Ataxia Foundation Incorporated. 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 37 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 17% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 8% 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.
71 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. 71 of the 123 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 THE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MILWAUKEE CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds University of Notre Dame du Lac ↗
- Who funds CEDAR LAKES CONSERVATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗
- Who funds LAKE PARK FRIENDS LTD ↗
- Who funds RIVEREDGE NATURE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds A SAFE PLACE INC ↗
- Who funds KIDS MATTER INC ↗
- Who funds MILTON ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds WISCONSIN PUBLIC RADIO ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds NANTUCKET BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB INC ↗
- Who funds Big Sur Land Trust ↗
- Who funds WISCONSIN YOUTH SOCCER ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds URBAN ECOLOGY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds EASTSIDE SENIOR SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF GREATER MILWAUKEE INC ↗
- Who funds MUSEUM OF WISCONSIN ART INC ↗
- Who funds MAYO CLINIC ↗
- Who funds CLEAN WISCONSIN INC ↗
- Who funds MEARTH ↗
- Who funds CARLETON COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds Five Rivers Conservation Trust ↗
- Who funds MISSISSIPPI VALLEY CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds GATHERING WATERS INC ↗
- Who funds TALL PINES CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds MILWAUKEE ART MUSEUM INC ↗
- Who funds NANTUCKET LAND & WATER COUNCIL INC ↗
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: Greater Milwaukee Foundation Inc · Herbert H Kohl Charities Inc · Green Bay Packers Foundation · Baird Foundation Inc · United Way of Greater Milwaukee & Waukesha County Inc · Ralph Evinrude Foundation Inc · Evan & Marion Helfaer Foundation · Milwaukee Jewish Federation Inc · Oscar & Augusta Schlegel Fdn · Anon Charitable Trust · West Bend Community Foundation Inc · Joseph and Vera Zilber Family Foundation Inc
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 Mutschler Family Foundation 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.
- A Safe Place Inc — 45% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- Nantucket Dreamland Foundation Inc — 4% of income from government
- Nantucket Conservation Foundation Inc — 4% of income from government
- Best Buddies International Inc — 4% of income from government
- Pan-Massachusetts Challenge Inc — 0% of income from government
- Milton Academy — 0% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Mutschler Family Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Mutschler Family Foundation Inc 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.