Skip to content

· 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 it funds
01FY2024 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$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
GREAT LAKES COMMUNITY CONSERVATION CORPS$25,000
RIVEREDGE NATURE CENTER INC$25,000
RESTORING LANDS$25,000
NEARBY NATURE MILWAUKEE$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

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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY24–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 91% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its 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%SIXTEENTH STREET COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS: $25k → 17%URBAN ECOLOGY CENTER INC: $25k → 17%GREAT LAKES COMMUNITY CONSERVATION CORPS: $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
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 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
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
Southeast Wisconsin Land Conservancy

Obtain and manage land of ecological significance.

Environment
5
ArtWorks for Milwaukee Inc

ArtWorks for Milwaukee combines arts engagement with workforce development through intensive, ten-month, paid internships for teens. We hire cohorts of about ten youth to complete community-focused art projects while learning transferable…

Arts & Culture
6
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
7
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
8
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
9
Racine Revitalization Partnership Inc

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

Community Improvement
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
Glacial Lakes Conservancy Inc

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.

Environment
12
Madison LakeWay Partners Inc

Madison LakeWay Partners is a private 501(c)(3) organization partnering with the City of Madison to leverage philanthropic dollars to reimagine the Lake Monona waterfront along John Nolen Drive. The Partners imagine the waterfront as a…

Recreation & Sports
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Urban Ecology Center Inc; 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 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. 11 of the 13 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
5/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Nearby Nature Milwaukee: $25,000 · EnvironmentNearby Nature MilwaukeeRIVEREDGE NATURE CENTER INC: $25,000 · EnvironmentRIVEREDGE NATURE CENTER INCRIVER REVITALIZATION FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 · EnvironmentRIVER REVITALIZATION FOUNDATION INCURBAN 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 grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's 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 budgetNearby Nature Milwaukee: $25,000 over 1y, 6.0% 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 budgetRIVER REVITALIZATION FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 over 1y, 20% 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
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.

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

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's 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, FY20–25
    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.
    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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 13 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Reflo’s filings →

    More from the funding graph