Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Charitable Foundation

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.

$4k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$2k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Philanthropy$15kInternational$12kReligion$7kHealth$6kArts & Culture$2kRecreation & Sports$1kPublic Benefit$500
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,100
Median grant
3
States reached
$132k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
USGF$1,500
IMPACT 100 GREATER WAUSAU$1,100
WALLS OF WITTENBERG$1,000
ST JUDES HOSPITAL$500
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 43% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 12%DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS: $250 → 17%WISCONSIN INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY AND SERVICE: $500 → 11%THE HELPING FOUNDATION: $5k → 11%ST JUDES HOSPITAL: $2k → 17%CARE INC: $200 → 13%USGF: $5k → 16%SMILE TRAIN: $100 → 17%COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF NORTHERN WI: $1k → 11%HELPING FOUNDATION: $4k → 11%ST JUDES HOSPITAL: $2k → 17%USGF: $3k → 16%COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF NORTHERN WI: $1k → 11%WALLS OF WITTENBERG: $3k → 11%ST JUDES HOSPITAL: $1k → 17%USGF: $2k → 16%COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF NORTHERN WI: $500 → 11%WALLS OF WITTENBURG: $2k → 11%ST JUDES HOSPITAL: $500 → 17%USGF: $2k → 16%WALLS OF WITTENBERG: $2k → 11%USA GYMNASTICS RHYTHMIC PROGRA: $1k → 16%IMPACT 100 GREATER WAUSAU: $1k → 11%WALLS OF WITTENBERG: $1k → 11%THE HELPING FOUNDATION: $1k → 11%WALLS OF WITTENBERG: $1k → 11%HELPING FOUNDATION: $500 → 11%THE HELPING FOUNDATION: $500 → 11%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 100% of The Charitable Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

The Charitable Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$40k · 5 repeat orgs$3k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +59% since the first grant, against +34% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
5

Total granted

$40k
$2k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+59%
+34%

Still filing today

60%
60%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
PhilanthropyInternationalHealthArts & CultureOther
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

  • U
    USGF
    4× · 2022–2025 · $12k
  • TH
    THE HELPING FOUNDATION
    5× · 2019–2024 · $11k · revenue -68%
  • WO
    WALLS OF WITTENBERG INC
    5× · 2020–2025 · $9k · revenue +243%

Funded once

  • UG
    USA GYMNASTICS RHYTHMIC PROGRA
    one grant, 2021 · $1k
  • WI
    WISCONSIN INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY AND SERVICE
    one grant, 2019 · $500
  • MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $250 · revenue +79%
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
05the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 11 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)
7/7
Grantees still filing
5/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

USGF: $11,500 · OtherUSGFCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF NORTHERN WI: $2,500 · OtherCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF NORTHERN WIUSA GYMNASTICS RHYTHMIC PROGRA: $1,000 · OtherUSA GYMNASTICS RHYTHMIC PROGRA+2 more: $600 · OtherTHE HELPING FOUNDATION: $11,000 · PhilanthropyTHE HELPING FOUNDATIONIMPACT100 GREATER WAUSAU INC: $1,100 · PhilanthropyIMPACT100 GREATER WAUSAU INCWALLS OF WITTENBERG INC: $9,000 · Arts & CultureWALLS OF WITTENBERG INCST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $5,500 · HealthST JUDE CHILDR…MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $250 · InternationalCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC: $200 · International
Other$15,600Philanthropy$12,100Arts & Culture$9,000Health$5,500International$450

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 budgetTHE HELPING FOUNDATION: $11,000 over 5y, 13% of budgetWALLS OF WITTENBERG INC: $9,000 over 5y, 7.3% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $5,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetIMPACT100 GREATER WAUSAU INC: $1,100 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSMILE TRAIN INC: $100 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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 11 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 Charitable’s filings →

    More from the funding graph