How much did RUTH ST JOHN & JOHN DUNHAM WEST grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 42% of RUTH ST JOHN & JOHN DUNHAM WEST’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

2020

zoological manitowocbehalf hamiltonmuscular dystrophyrivers behalfart museumcrossing manitowoc

2021

mantyfirehospitality hopezoological manitowocboys girlslakeshore interfaithinterfaith hospitality

2022

visionaries luvmanitwochospitality manitowocnazianznami manitowocartssisters shoreline

2023

valderssisters shorelinembranchfirehope manitowocmanitowoc behalfice age

2024

art mueumzoological socieyreedsvilledistricthelathvalley manitowoctechnical foundaation

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

03FY2024 · 144 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k33 grants · $156k
$10k–50k86 grants · $1.7M
$50k–250k21 grants · $1.9M
$250k+4 grants · $1.1M

$20,000

Median grant

States reached

$125M

Total assets

Largest grants

MANITOWOC PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT FOUNDATION$300,000
LIGHTHOUSE COMMUNITY RECOVERY CENTER INC$250,000
LAKESHORE HUMANE SOCIETY$250,000
DEMENTIA INNOVATIONS INC$250,000
LAKESHORE TECHNICAL COLLEGE FOUNDAATION INC$150,000
LAWRENCE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN$150,000
ASCEND SERVICES INC$150,000
MANITOWOC COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY$130,000
CITY OF TWO RIVERS PARKS AND REC DEPARTMENT$100,000
LAKESHORE REGIONAL CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER$100,000
ROGERS STREET FISHING VILLAGE INC$100,000
WOODLAND DUNES$100,000
EXCEPTIONAL EQUESTRIANS$100,000
LAKESHORE FIRST ROBOTICS$95,000
PRODUCTION FARM$76,800

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 (FY20–24, $699k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10% — the area typically sits at 10%. 89% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-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.

73%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$14M · 104 repeat orgs$5.2M to everyone else

104 repeat relationships — 60 still active in FY2024, 44 since wound down; 43 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

104

Total granted

$14M

$3.2M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+42%

+47%

Still filing today

57%

23%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 59% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2.0M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

HealthArts & CultureEducationHuman ServicesEnvironmentPhilanthropyOther

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

CT
CORE TREATMENT SERVICES INC
5× · 2020–2024 · $718k · revenue +252%
RA
RAHR-WEST ART MUSEUM CHARITABLE FOUNDATION
4× · 2020–2023 · $713k · revenue +109% · 60% of their budget
MC
MANITOWOC COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY
5× · 2020–2024 · $656k · revenue +25% · 39% of their budget

Funded once

BA
BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB FOX VALLEY INC ON BEHLF OF BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB MANITOWO
one grant, 2021 · $500k
CO
CITY OF TWO RIVERS
one grant, 2021 · $300k
VD
VAN DER BROHE ARBORETUM INCgraduated
one grant, 2022 · $223k · revenue +47%

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.

Waukesha County Land Conservancy Inc

To protect environmentally senstive land in waukesha county wisconsin

Environment

Manitowoc County Habitat for Humanity

To create decent, affordable housing for those in need

—

Progress Lakeshore Inc

To assist local businesses in their growth in the manitowoc county area and to attract new businesses to the manitowoc county area.

Community Improvement

Wisconsin Association of Lakes Inc

The wisconsin association of lakes works to conserve, enhance, and restore wisconsin's lakes.

Environment

Waukesha County Historical Society & Museum Inc

The museum is an educational institution dedicated to preserving the history and culture of waukesha county.

—

Fund for Lake Michigan Inc

Lake Michigan is one of Wisconsin's greatest assets, and its water is critical to the state's future. The Fund for Lake Michigan is here to help sustain the Lake on behalf of the people and places that depend on it. Our goal is to have a…

Environment

Milwaukee County Historical Society Inc

The milwaukee county historical society was founded in 1935 to collect, preserve, and make available materials relating to the history of the milwaukee community.

Arts & Culture

The Chamber of Manitowoc County Inc

The chamber of manitowoc county is a member-driven organization that provides resources and services to promote and maintain a strong business environment.

—

Friends of Kishwauketoe

To further improve and maintain the kishwauketoe nature conservancy.

Environment

Manitowish Waters Bike Trail Inc

Develop and maintain bike trail

Recreation & Sports

Zoological Society of Milwaukee Cty

The mission of the zoological society is to take part in conserving wildlife and endangered species, to educate people about the importance of wildlife and the environment, and to support the milwaukee county zoo. the society was organized…

Animals

University Foundation - Manitowoc Inc

To provide scholarships for students attending uw-manitowoc, as well as grants for faculty/staff development and campus promotion.

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Crossing of Manitowoc County Inc and the most unlike its peers is Hygeia Corp. 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 23 years old; the field is 19. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 17% startups (under 5 years old) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 7% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/97

the rest of the field

371/5,113

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

88 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)

86/88

Grantees still filing

61/88

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$9,287,056Health$2,676,877Education$2,439,500Arts & Culture$2,427,900Human Services$1,042,250Philanthropy$957,500Environment$556,764

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.

Lakeshore Community Foundation IncWI77.7× affinity34 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Lakeshore Community Foundation Inc · Green Bay Packers Foundation · Harold C Kallies Charitable Trust · Jane & Arthur Stangel Fund Inc · Frank G & Frieda K Brotz Family · Community Foundation for the Fox Valley · Kohler Foundation Inc · Greater Green Bay Community · Nash Family Foundation · Greater Milwaukee Foundation Inc · Fk Bemis Family Foundation Inc · Alliant Energy 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 RUTH ST JOHN & JOHN DUNHAM WEST 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

0get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

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: NAMI INC OF MANITOWOC COUNTY.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

medium risk

3 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 391945891 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 NAMI INC OF MANITOWOC COUNTY, 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

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue held over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 88% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
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 Ruth St John & John Dunham West?

Find your warmest path to Ruth St John & John Dunham West 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.

RUTH ST JOHN & JOHN DUNHAM WEST

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

88 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Ruth St John & John Dunham West?

More from the funding graph

RUTH ST JOHN & JOHN DUNHAM WEST

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

88 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Ruth St John & John Dunham West?

More from the funding graph