Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Reflo Inc

To catalyze sustainable water use, green infrastructure, and equitable water resource management that support triple-bottom-line outcomes that are grounded in strong partner relationships.

$315k
Granted FY2024still arriving
13
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$31k
Largest
01What you fund
01FY2024 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$25,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TRUE SKOOL INC$30,612
MENOMONEE VALLEY PARTNERS INC$25,784
NEARBY NATURE MILWAUKEE$25,000
GREAT LAKES COMMUNITY CONSERVATION CORPS$25,000
RIVEREDGE NATURE CENTER INC$25,000
RESTORING LANDS$25,000
SIXTEENTH STREET COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS$25,000
URBAN ECOLOGY CENTER INC$24,810
TEENS GROW GREENS$24,392
CREAM CITY CONSERVATION & CONSULTING LLC$22,658
AUDUBON GREAT LAKES$22,000
GROUNDWORK MILWAUKEE INC$20,000
MILWAUKEE PUBLIC SCHOOLS$20,000
02The need
02

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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY24–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 91% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%RESTORING LANDS: $25k → 6%NEARBY NATURE MILWAUKEE: $25k → 17%AUDUBON GREAT LAKES: $22k → 14%TEENS GROW GREENS: $24k → 17%CREAM CITY CONSERVATION & CONSULTING LLC: $23k → 17%GREAT LAKES COMMUNITY CONSERVATION CORPS: $25k → 17%URBAN ECOLOGY CENTER INC: $25k → 17%SIXTEENTH STREET COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS: $25k → 17%TRUE SKOOL INC: $31k → 17%MENOMONEE VALLEY PARTNERS INC: $26k → 17%GROUNDWORK MILWAUKEE INC: $20k → 17%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 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.

03Your 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.

1
Milwaukee Riverkeeper Inc

Our mission is to protect water quality and wildlife habitat in the river corridors and to advocate for sound land use in the Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic River Watersheds.

Environment
2
Milwaukee Audubon Society Inc

Protect and restore Wisconsin's natural heritage and ecology through active leadership, education and stewardship

Environment
3
Milwaukee Water Commons Inc

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…

Environment
4
Urban Rivers Inc

Our mission is to transform city rivers into urban wildlife sanctuaries.

Environment
5
Friends of Schlitz Audubon Nature Center Inc

Schlitz audubon nature center conserves our land's diverse habitats on lake michigan and provides meaningful experiences and environmental education for all.

Environment
6
Milwaukee Parks Foundation Inc

Engage our community in supporting milwaukee county parks to collectively steward a thriving park system.

Environment
7
Southeast Wisconsin Land Conservancy

Obtain and manage land of ecological significance.

Environment
8
River Bend Nature Center Inc

River bend nature center exists to provide environmental education and outdoor recreation to the children, families and adults of racine and southeastern wisconsin.

Environment
9
Wild Rivers Conservancy of the St Croix & Namekagon

The mission of wild rivers conservancy of the st. croix & namekagon is to inspire stewardship to forever ensure the rare ecological integrity of the st. croix and namekagon riverway. the conservancy of the st. croix and namekagon works…

Environment
10
Restoring Lands Inc

To protect and preserve the natural areas, open spaces and rural character of Ozaukee, Milwaukee and Washington Counties. Through conservation, education and outreach, the Organization will preserve the regions rich natural and rural…

Environment
11
Racine Revitalization Partnership Inc

Our mission is to build a better Racine through the social, physical, and economic revitalization of our neighborhoods.

Community Improvement
12
Great River Passage Conservancy

Working in partnership with the City of Saint Paul's Great River Passage Initiative, the Great River Passage Conservancy leads advocacy and private fundraising efforts for capital projects and programs along Saint Paul's 17 miles of the…

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Urban Ecology Center Inc and the most unlike its peers is National Audubon Society Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

03the grantee network

11 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 11 of the 13 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
4/11
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

RIVER REVITALIZATION FOUNDATION INC — $25,000 · EnvironmentRIVER REVITALIZATION FOUNDATION INCRIVEREDGE NATURE CENTER INC — $25,000 · EnvironmentRIVEREDGE NATURE CENTER INCNearby Nature Milwaukee — $25,000 · EnvironmentNearby Nature MilwaukeeURBAN ECOLOGY CENTER INC — $24,810 · EnvironmentURBAN ECOLOGY CENTER INCNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC — $22,000 · EnvironmentNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INCGROUNDWORK MILWAUKEE INC — $20,000 · EnvironmentGROUNDWORK MILWAUKEE INCSIXTEENTH STREET COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS INC — $25,000 · OtherSIXTEENTH STREET COMMUNI…CREAM CITY CONSERVATION & CONSULTING LLC — $22,658 · OtherCREAM CITY CONSERVATION …MILWAUKEE PUBLIC SCHOOLS — $20,000 · OtherMILWAUKEE PUBLIC SCHOOLSMENOMONEE VALLEY PARTNERS INC — $25,784 · Community ImprovementMENOMONEE VALLEY P…GREAT LAKES COMMUNITY CONSERVATION CORPS INC — $25,000 · Community ImprovementGREAT LAKES COMMUN…TRUE SKOOL INC — $30,612 · Arts & CultureTRUE SKOOL …TEENS GROW GREENS INC — $24,392 · Food & Nutrition
Environment$141,810Other$67,658Community Improvement$50,784Arts & Culture$30,612Food & Nutrition$24,392

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetTRUE SKOOL INC — $30,612 over 1y, 7.5% of budgetMENOMONEE VALLEY PARTNERS INC — $25,784 over 1y, 4.9% of budgetGREAT LAKES COMMUNITY CONSERVATION CORPS INC — $25,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetRIVER REVITALIZATION FOUNDATION INC — $25,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetSIXTEENTH STREET COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS INC — $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRIVEREDGE NATURE CENTER INC — $25,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetNearby Nature Milwaukee — $25,000 over 1y, 6.0% of budgetURBAN ECOLOGY CENTER INC — $24,810 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTEENS GROW GREENS INC — $24,392 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC — $22,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGROUNDWORK MILWAUKEE INC — $20,000 over 1y, 3.5% of budget
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.

Greater Milwaukee Foundation IncWI23.6× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Greater Milwaukee Foundation Inc · Joseph and Vera Zilber Family Foundation Inc · Herbert H Kohl Charities Inc · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Youth Foundation Inc · Baird Foundation Inc · The Brookby Foundation · United Way of Greater Milwaukee & Waukesha County Inc · American Cancer Society 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 Reflo 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Reflo Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Reflo 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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 13 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph