Skip to content

· Private foundation

Steve and Christa Slinger Family Gift Fund Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$534k
Granted FY2025still arriving
45
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$500k
Largest
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2022 to 2025.

Human Services$26kRecreation & Sports$15kEducation$15kYouth Development$15kReligion$14kFood & Nutrition$13kPublic Safety & Disaster$11kArts & Culture$8kOther$0
02FY2025 · 45 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k44 grants · $34k
  • $250k+1 grant · $500k
$200
Median grant
8
States reached
$309k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$500,000
RANDOLPH SCHOOL DISTRICT - SLINGER$5,000
CHILD FUND INTL$4,000
RCF FFA ALUMNI ASSOCIATION$2,500
LIVING HOPE FOOD PANTRY$2,000
Individual grant recipient$2,000
CASA GUADALUPE$2,000
RANDOLPH COURTLAND UNITED METHODIST$2,000
Individual grant recipient$2,000
FIRIST UNITARIAN SOCIETY$1,000
HABITAT FOR HUMANITY$1,000
ST VINCENT DE PAUL OF DODGE COUNTY$1,000
FAITH CHRISTIAN SCHOOL$1,000
GIRL SCOUTS OF BLACK HAWK COUNCIL$1,000
PROJECT HOPE$1,000
02The need
03

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:

Its human-services grants (FY22–25, $14k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 58% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%PROJECT HOPE: $1k → 17%PROJECT HOPE: $1k → 17%UNITED METHODIST CHILDREN'S SERVICES: $100 → 17%UNITED METHODIST CHILDREN'S SERVICES: $100 → 17%PAVE: $2k → 17%PAVE: $2k → 17%PAVE: $1k → 17%PAVE: $1k → 17%CLOTHES FOR KIDS: $1k → 9%ST VINCENT DE PAUL OF DODGE COUNTY: $1k → 9%ST VINCENT DE PAUL OF DODGE COUNTY: $1k → 9%CLOTHES FOR KIDS: $1k → 9%ST VINCENT DE PAUL OF DODGE COUNTY: $1k → 9%ST VINCENT DE PAUL OF DODGE COUNTY: $500 → 9%CLOTHES FOR KIDS: $500 → 9%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.

Which US states its grants reach

MN
IL
WI
SD
CO
VA
MD
TN
DC
OK
GA
TX
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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

4%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$107k · 46 repeat orgs$2.9M to everyone else

46 repeat relationships: 27 still active in FY2025, 19 since wound down; 18 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

46
20

Total granted

$107k
$2.4M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+7%
+9%

Still filing today

37%
15%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 4% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $513k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesInternationalHealthFood & NutritionEducationYouth DevelopmentOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • LH
    LIVING HOPE FOOD PANTRY INC
    4× · 2022–2025 · $7k · revenue +36%
  • CI
    CHILDFUND INTERNATIONAL USA
    2× · 2024–2025 · $6k · revenue +0%
  • PA
    PEOPLE AGAINST A VIOLENT ENVIRONMENT IN
    4× · 2022–2025 · $6k · revenue +10%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2024 · $2.4M
  • VO
    VILLAGE OF RANDOLPH COMMUNITY POOL FUND
    one grant, 2023 · $15k
  • RS
    RANDOLPH SCHOOL DISTRICT
    one grant, 2023 · $5k
How this is measured

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

04Its 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
Lifeworks Services Inc

Lifeworks' mission is to partner with people with disabilities to drive change by increasing opportunity and access in the community.

Human Services
2
Community Care Health Plan Inc

Community care health plan's mission is to develop and demonstrate innovative, flexible, community-based approaches to care for at-risk adults, in order to optimize their quality of life and optimize the allocation of community resources.

Health
3
Commonwealth Care Alliance Inc

Commonwealth care alliance, inc.'s mission is to improve the health and well-being of people with significant needs by innovating, coordinating and providing the highest quality, individualized care.

Health
4
Disability Rights Wisconsin Inc

Legal protection and advocacy to protect the rights of people with disabilities in wisconsin.

—
5
International Development Enterprises

See schedule o for a more detailed description of ide's mission statement and achievements.

International
6
Handicap International

Handicap international dba humanity & inclusion (hi) works with people with disabilities and people living in situations of vulnerability, including poverty, exclusion, conflict, and disaster.

International
7
Consumer Healthcare Products Association

Empower self-care by preserving and expanding choice and availability of consumer healthcare products.

—
8
California Dental Association

The california dental association is committed to the success of our members in service to their patients and the public.

Community Improvement
9
International Aids Vaccine Initiative Inc

A nonprofit scientific research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.

International
10
Consumer Directed Choices Inc

As the premier provider of consumer-directed personal assistance we empower independence and advocate for people with disabilities, seniors, and their families.

Human Services
11
Christel House International Inc

Chi prepares graduates of the christel house schools operated by its affiliated entities, which chi funds and oversees, to achieve upward economic mobility, demonstrate good citizenship, and become empowered to identify and realize their…

International
12
Midwest Dairy Association

Midwest dairy works with others to give consumers an excellent dairy experience increasing sales, fostering innovation, and inspiring consumer confidence of dairy products and practices.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is March of Dimes Inc; the most unlike its peers is American Diabetes Association. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

27 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. 27 of the 84 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
27/27
Grantees still filing
18/27
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $2,400,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $500,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+67 more: $111,518 · OtherPEOPLE AGAINST A VIOLENT ENVIRONMENT IN: $6,000 · Human ServicesSOCIETY ST VINCENT DE PAUL COUNCIL: $3,500 · Human ServicesCLOTHES FOR KIDS INC: $2,500 · Human ServicesPROJECT HOPE INC: $2,000 · Human Services+1 more: $200 · Human ServicesLIVING HOPE FOOD PANTRY INC: $7,000 · Food & NutritionSECOND HARVEST FOODBANK OF SOUTHERN WI: $4,000 · Food & Nutrition+1 more: $100 · Food & NutritionCHILDFUND INTERNATIONAL USA: $6,000 · InternationalPROJECT HOPE - THE PEOPLE-TO-PEOPLE HEALTH FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 · InternationalCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC: $850 · International+1 more: $100 · InternationalCHURCH HEALTH SERVICES INC: $2,300 · ReligionBEAVER DAM AREA COMMUNITY THEATRE INC: $1,500 · Arts & CultureLATINO ACADEMY OF WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT INC: $1,000 · Employment
Other$3,011,518Human Services$14,200Food & Nutrition$11,100International$7,950Religion$2,300Arts & Culture$1,500Employment$1,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetLIVING HOPE FOOD PANTRY INC: $7,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetCHILDFUND INTERNATIONAL USA: $6,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPEOPLE AGAINST A VIOLENT ENVIRONMENT IN: $6,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY NORTHWOODS INC: $5,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetSECOND HARVEST FOODBANK OF SOUTHERN WI: $4,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSOCIETY ST VINCENT DE PAUL COUNCIL: $3,500 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetCLOTHES FOR KIDS INC: $2,500 over 2y, 4.7% of budgetCHURCH HEALTH SERVICES INC: $2,300 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetPROJECT HOPE INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetBEAVER DAM AREA COMMUNITY THEATRE INC: $1,500 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetLATINO ACADEMY OF WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFAITH CHRISTIAN SCHOOL INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC: $850 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetUNITED METHODIST CHILDREN'S SERVICES OF WISCONSIN INC: $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEaster Seals Southeast Wisconsin Inc: $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Diabetes Association: $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMARCH OF DIMES INC: $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetDISABLED VETERANS NATIONAL FOUNDATION: $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetChix 4 A Cause LTD: $200 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CORNUCOPIA INSTITUTE INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDucks Unlimited Inc: $50 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds LIVING HOPE FOOD PANTRY INC ↗
  • Who funds CHILDFUND INTERNATIONAL USA ↗
  • Who funds PEOPLE AGAINST A VIOLENT ENVIRONMENT IN ↗
  • Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY NORTHWOODS INC ↗
  • Who funds SECOND HARVEST FOODBANK OF SOUTHERN WI ↗
  • Who funds SOCIETY ST VINCENT DE PAUL COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds CLOTHES FOR KIDS INC ↗
  • Who funds CHURCH HEALTH SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT HOPE INC ↗
  • Who funds BEAVER DAM AREA COMMUNITY THEATRE INC ↗
  • Who funds LATINO ACADEMY OF WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT INC ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT HOPE - THE PEOPLE-TO-PEOPLE HEALTH FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds FAITH CHRISTIAN SCHOOL INC ↗

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.

Alliant Energy Foundation IncWI20.6× affinity8 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Alliant Energy Foundation Inc · The Jack and Arlene Schumann Foundation Inc · The Peter J Seippel Foundation Inc · Beaver Dam Community Hospitals Foundation Inc · Green Bay Packers Foundation · Duane and Kathleen Foulkes Foundation Inc · Otto Bremer Trust · Baird Foundation 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 Steve and Christa Slinger Family Gift Fund Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Steve and Christa Slinger Family Gift Fund Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    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.

    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 84 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Steve and Christa Slinger Family Gift’s filings →

    More from the funding graph