How much did RANDALL J & JUDITH F HAKE grant in FY2025?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 82% of RANDALL J & JUDITH F HAKE’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2018

—

2019

—

2020

—

2021

—

2022

methodistcatholic churchkohler

2023

symphony orchestra

2024

arts

2025

researcharts

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2025 · 36 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

Under $10k33 grants · $35k
$10k–50k3 grants · $73k

$500

Median grant

States reached

$99k

Total assets

Largest grants

TRINITY LUTHERAN CHURCH$37,250
STEPHANIE H WEILL CENTER$25,500
CAMP EVERGREEN$10,300
WASH FOR LIFE$8,000
JOHN MICHAEL KOHLER ARTS CENTER$5,120
GRACE LUTHERAN CHURCH$5,050
IMPRESSIONS FINE ART GALLERY$2,500
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY$2,000
RCS EMPOWERS INC$1,500
SHEBOYGAN LUTHERAN HIGH SCHOOL$1,100
SHEBOYGAN THEATRE COMPANY$1,100
HEARTHSTONE OF WISCONSIN$1,000
CHEESE CAPITAL WINTER PARK$1,000
JOURNEYS LUTHERAN SCHOOL$1,000
SHEBOYGAN SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA$1,000

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY25–25, $8k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9% — the area typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; 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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$289k · 34 repeat orgs$37k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +33% since the first grant, against +23% for the ones you funded once.

34 repeat relationships — 20 still active in FY2025, 14 since wound down; 16 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$289k

$16k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+33%

+23%

Still filing today

44%

33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 81% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $21k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

HealthEducationArts & CultureRecreation & SportsPublic BenefitAnimalsOther

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

CAMP EVERGREEN CORPORATION
4× · 2021–2025 · $11k · revenue +33%
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
9× · 2017–2025 · $11k · revenue +33%
BG
BOOKWORM GARDENS
4× · 2017–2025 · $3k · revenue +87%

Funded once

TL
TRINITY LUTHERAN CEMETERY
one grant, 2024 · $10k
SM
STEPHEN MINISTRIES SAINT LOUIS
one grant, 2020 · $2k
KS
KELLOG SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT
one grant, 2022 · $1k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

Sheboygan County Chamber of Commerce Inc

Promote sheboygan county business development.

—

Lake Country Academy Inc

To enhance student educational opportunities in sheboygan county.

Education

Sheboygan Area Credit Union

Our mission is to provide efficient, progressive financial services and products to our owner-members in agreement with credit union philosophy

—

Sheboygan Senior Community Inc

To provide and operate a retirement home, health care center, and related services in the greater sheboygan area for elderly and physically handicapped adults.

Health

Sheboygan County Historical Research Centerinc

The sheboygan county historical research center serves the public by collecting, preserving and making available the written documentation and images of sheboygan county.

—

Shelby County Historical Society

Operation of shelby county historical museum.

—

Sheridan Community Land Trust

To promote agricultural landscapes, open space, wildlife habitats, historical structures and sites, and to provide opportunities for recreation, these interests being complimentary and essential to the quality of life and economic…

Environment

Door County Land Trust Inc

Protecting door county's exceptional lands and waters forever

Environment

Wisconsin Waterfowl Association Inc

Working to further restoration and conservation of wisconsin's waterfowl and wetland resources.

Environment

Kenosha Community Foundation

We lead, serve and collaborate with donors to create enduring philanthropy.

Philanthropy

Environmental Park Trust of Sheboygan

The promotion, development and maintenance of the ellwood h. may environmental park.

—

Land Conservancy of West Michigan

The Land Conservancy of West Michigan exists to help people protect, enjoy and care for natural land in West Michigan.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sheboygan County Humane Society and the most unlike its peers is Coastal Conservation Association. 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 52 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) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 5% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 7% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

2%1/44

the rest of the field

2,638/36,482

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.

05the grantee network

33 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

31/33

Grantees still filing

21/33

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$270,222Health$15,660Arts & Culture$14,740Recreation & Sports$12,000Human Services$8,000Education$3,550Housing & Shelter$1,500

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.

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.

Frank G & Frieda K Brotz FamilyWI31.1× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Frank G & Frieda K Brotz Family · Green Bay Packers Foundation · Lakeshore Community Foundation Inc · Kohler Foundation Inc · Alliant Energy Foundation Inc · The Zieve Foundation · Fk Bemis Family Foundation Inc · Baird Foundation Inc · Grover Family Foundation Inc · Wm Collins Kohler Foundation Inc · Terry Kohler Family Foundation Inc · The Sartori 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 organisation RANDALL J & JUDITH F HAKE 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

1get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: SHEBOYGAN COUNTY CANCER CARE FUND.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~55 months of operating runway; revenue contracted over 8 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

8 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 392002260 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on SHEBOYGAN COUNTY CANCER CARE FUND, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 55 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue contracted over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 0% of their budget — diversified.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Randall J & Judith F Hake?

Find your warmest path to Randall J & Judith F Hake through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

RANDALL J & JUDITH F HAKE

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

33 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Randall J & Judith F Hake?

More from the funding graph

RANDALL J & JUDITH F HAKE

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

33 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Randall J & Judith F Hake?

More from the funding graph