· Private foundation
The Clarence Wallace & Dolores Lynch Wallace Family Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 46% of THE CLARENCE WALLACE & DOLORES LYNCH WALLACE FAMILY FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k47 grants · $141k
- $10k–50k22 grants · $364k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF WISCONSIN - CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER | $25,000 |
| HABITAT FOR HUMANITY | $25,000 |
| PILLARS | $25,000 |
| BASIC NEEDS GIVING PARTNERSHIP | $25,000 |
| EMPOWERED TUTORING (LIFE TOOLS FOUNDATION) | $20,000 |
| COTS | $20,000 |
| RIVERVIEW GARDENS | $20,000 |
| APRICITY | $20,000 |
| XAVIER HIGH SCHOOL | $20,000 |
| REBUILDING TOGETHER | $15,000 |
| FOX VALLEY LITERACY COUNCIL | $15,000 |
| NEIGHBORWORKS GREEN BAY | $15,000 |
| BOYS & GIRLS CLUB FV | $15,000 |
| TRI-COUNTY DENTAL | $15,000 |
| YOUTHGO | $13,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $506k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 26% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +33% since the first grant, against +13% for the ones you funded once.
95 repeat relationships — 49 still active in FY2025, 46 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $44k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- HFHABITAT FOR HUMANITY NORTHWOODS INC8× · 2017–2025 · $215k · revenue +323%
- ETEMPOWERED TUTORING INC8× · 2018–2025 · $192k · revenue +156% · 30% of their budget
- CICOTS INC8× · 2017–2025 · $160k · revenue +75%
Funded once
- BGBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF FOX VALLEYone grant, 2019 · $40k
- HOHOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR WOMEN INCone grant, 2021 · $25k · revenue -20%
- HOHOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR WOMENone grant, 2019 · $25k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
Wisconsin family ties changes lives by improving children's mental health. it accomplishes this mission through a set of interrelated activities that support and educate parents, and inform practitioners, policy makers and the public about…
Cap services, inc.'s mission is to transform people and communities to advance social and economic justice.
Legal protection and advocacy to protect the rights of people with disabilities in wisconsin.
Goodwill of south central wisconsin's mission is to help people in our community to live, work and thrive through housing, employment and supportive services. see schedule o for continuationsupported employment and job skills training are…
Pathways of wisconsin provides supported employment opportunities and empowerment through quality, person-centered programming for individuals of all abilities.
Lifeworks' mission is to partner with people with disabilities to drive change by increasing opportunity and access in the community.
We conduct impartial public policy research and analysis to drive informed debate and effective decision-making in the state of wisconsin.
Innovative services, inc. (isi) cares for those with disabilities, helping them lead fulfilling lives with maximum independence. innovative's vision is to be the most trusted care provider for people with disabilities in wisconsin.
Eliminating barriers to employment by providing pathways for those who are underserved, underrepresented and disadvantaged who have a goal of building skills that lead to sustained employment and improved financial stability.
To advance progressive values, ideas and policies through research, policy, networking, advocacy and public education.
Aurora family service partners with families to enhance their capability to anticipate, identify and manage challenges they face in their everyday lives through the integration of health, mental health, and social services providing…
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.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Community Foundation for the Fox Valley Region Inc and the most unlike its peers is Project Drawdown. 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 28 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 17% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.8% lost their exemption, against 8% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
126 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 126 of the 212 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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.
- Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY NORTHWOODS INC ↗
- Who funds EMPOWERED TUTORING INC ↗
- Who funds COTS INC ↗
- Who funds PILLARS INC ↗
- Who funds THE MOORING PROGRAMS INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds Accelerate Institute ↗
- Who funds RIVERVIEW GARDENS INC ↗
- Who funds TRI-COUNTY COMMUNITY DENTAL CLINIC INC ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUB FOX VALLEY INC ↗
- Who funds NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES OF GREEN BAY INC ↗
- Who funds YOUTH GO INC ↗
- Who funds FOX VALLEY LITERACY COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY CLOTHES CLOSET ↗
- Who funds ST JOSEPH FOOD PROGRAM INC ↗
- Who funds CASA OF THE FOX CITIES INC ↗
- Who funds SAMARITAN COUNSELING CENTER OF THE FOX VALLEY INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY FOUNDATION FOR THE FOX VALLEY REGION INC ↗
- Who funds HARBOR HOUSE DOMESTIC ABUSE PROGRAMS INC ↗
- Who funds BASIC NEEDS GIVING PARTNERSHIP INC ↗
- Who funds WISCONSIBS INC ↗
- Who funds YWCA EvanstonNorth Shore ↗
- Who funds BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF EAST CENTRAL WISCONSIN INC ↗
- Who funds LAD LAKE INC ↗
- Who funds HOMELESS CONNECTIONS INC ↗
- Who funds Rise Together Inc ↗
- Who funds HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR WOMEN INC ↗
- Who funds CATALPA HEALTH INC ↗
- Who funds FOX VALLEY VETERANS COUNCIL INC ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Community Foundation for the Fox Valley Region Inc · J J Keller Foundation Inc · US Ventureschmidt Family Foundation · Green Bay Packers Foundation · United Way Fox Cities Inc · Oshkosh Area Community Foundation Corporation · Greater Green Bay Community Foundation Inc · Theda and Tamblin Clark Smith Family Foundation Inc · Basic Needs Giving Partnership Inc · Oshkosh Corporation Foundation Inc · Hartwig Family Foundation Inc · The Boldt Family Fund 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 organization The Clarence Wallace & Dolores Lynch Wallace Family Foundation 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.
- World Relief Corp of National Association of Evangelicals — 67% of income from government
- Sandy Hook Promise Foundation — 0% of income from government
- Wounded Warrior Project Inc — 0% of income from government
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.