Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

The Guise-Weber Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$76k
Granted FY2025still arriving
35
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$7k
Largest
01What you fund
0197% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Arts & Culture$290kHuman Services$161kPhilanthropy$122kHealth$64kCommunity Improvement$56kRecreation & Sports$55kEducation$45kHousing & Shelter$44kOther$0
02FY2025 · 35 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$2,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PONY EXPRESS MUSEUM$7,000
MS CO AGENCY ON AGING$5,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
MARYSVILLE UP HISTORICAL DEPOT$5,000
COMMUNITY MEMORIAL HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION$4,540
RSVP OF NORTHEAST KANSAS$4,000
MARSHALL COUNTY CONNECTION$4,000
MARSHALL COUNTY ARTS COOPERATIVE$3,000
MARSHALL CO HISTORICAL SOCIETY$3,000
PEPC$3,000
MARYSVILLE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$3,000
AXTELL ECONOMIC DEVELOP CORP$2,500
ROTARY TOYS FOR TOTS$2,000
MARYSVILLE AREA COMMUNITY THEATRE$2,000
KOESTER HOUSE MUSEUM FOUNDATION$2,000
02The need
03

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 (FY17–25, $21k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 6%. 90% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 6%CATHOLIC CHARITIES: $2k → 5%CATHOLIC CHARITIES: $2k → 16%CATHOLIC CHARITIES: $1k → 20%RSVP OF NORTHEAST KANSAS: $4k → 11%RSVP OF NORTHEAST KANSAS: $4k → 11%RSVP OF NORTHEAST KANSAS: $4k → 11%RSVP OF NORTHEAST KANSAS: $2k → 11%RSVP OF NORTHEAST KANSAS: $2k → 11%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 linein 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 — 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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$864k · 45 repeat orgs$86k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +62% since the first grant, against -40% for the ones you funded once.

45 repeat relationships — 25 still active in FY2025, 20 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

45
16

Total granted

$864k
$72k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+62%
-40%

Still filing today

16%
6%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 82% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $14k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Arts & CultureHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementOther

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

  • MC
    MARSHALL COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETYINC
    7× · 2019–2025 · $39k · revenue +35%
  • MC
    MARSHALL COUNTY ARTS COOPERATIVE
    9× · 2017–2025 · $39k · revenue +154% · 49% of their budget
  • KH
    KOESTER HOUSE MUSEUM FOUNDATION INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $30k · revenue +202%

Funded once

  • WP
    WATERVILLE PRESERVATION SOCIETY
    one grant, 2018 · $25k · revenue -40%
  • N
    NCKCNC
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
  • CM
    COMMUNITY MEMORIAL HOSP FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $10k

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.

1
North Central Kansas Housing Opportunities Inc
Community Improvement
2
Marshall County Fair Association

Conducting annual agricultural fair

Recreation & Sports
3
Kansas Business Hall of Fame Inc
4
Nemaha County Historical Society

To preserve and maintain the history of nemaha county kanas

5
Marshall County Chamber of Commerce

Chamber of commerce

6
Marshall County Nonprofit Partnership Foundation
7
Haskell County Historical Society Haskell County Historical Society

To restore and preserve historical structures and memorabilia

8
Holt county historical society

Holt co history

Arts & Culture
9
Marshall County Historical Society Inc

Historic preservation of records buildings

Arts & Culture
10
Kossuth County Historical Society

Historical society to promote education about kossuth county, iowa history.

11
Marshall Area Fine Arts Council

Building community through the arts

12
Marshall Historical Society Inc

Preserve, protect, and promote marshalls heritage

Arts & Culture

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Marshall County Arts Cooperative and the most unlike its peers is Usd 364 Foundation. 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

9 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 9 of the 71 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/9
Grantees still filing
7/9
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

MARYSVILLE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $140,000 · OtherMARYSVILLE COMMUNITY FOUNDATIONPONY EXPRESS MUSEUM — $89,501 · OtherPONY EXPRESS MUSEUMPEPC — $70,500 · OtherPEPCMS CO HABITAT FOR HUMANITY — $44,000 · OtherMS CO HABITAT FOR HUMANITYMS CO AGENCY ON AGING — $42,500 · OtherMS CO AGENCY ON AGINGCOMMUNITY MEMORIAL HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION — $36,540 · OtherMARSHALL COUNTY CONNECTION INC — $29,405 · OtherMARYSVILLE UP HISTORICAL DEPOT — $28,200 · Other+56 more — $307,900 · Other+56 moreMARSHALL COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETYINC — $39,000 · Arts & CultureMARSHALL COUNTY…MARSHALL COUNTY ARTS COOPERATIVE — $38,500 · Arts & CultureMARSHALL COUNTY…KOESTER HOUSE MUSEUM FOUNDATION INC — $30,000 · Arts & CultureKOESTER HOUSE M…WATERVILLE PRESERVATION SOCIETY — $25,000 · Arts & CultureWATERVILLE PRES…RSVP OF NORTHEAST KANSAS INC — $16,000 · Human ServicesCATHOLIC CHARITIES INC — $5,000 · Human ServicesMARSHALL COUNTY PARTNERSHIP FOR GROWTH INC — $8,500 · Community Improvement
Other$788,546Arts & Culture$132,500Human Services$21,000Community Improvement$8,500

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetMARSHALL COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETYINC — $39,000 over 7y, 6.4% of budgetMARSHALL COUNTY ARTS COOPERATIVE — $38,500 over 9y, 49% of budgetKOESTER HOUSE MUSEUM FOUNDATION INC — $30,000 over 9y, 17% of budgetWATERVILLE PRESERVATION SOCIETY — $25,000 over 1y, 17% of budgetUSD 364 FOUNDATION — $18,000 over 8y, 15% of budgetRSVP OF NORTHEAST KANSAS INC — $16,000 over 5y, 3.8% of budgetMARYSVILLE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE — $14,000 over 7y, 4.1% of budgetMARSHALL COUNTY PARTNERSHIP FOR GROWTH INC — $8,500 over 4y, 3.3% of budgetCATHOLIC CHARITIES INC — $5,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budget
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 MARSHALL COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETYINC
  • Who funds MARSHALL COUNTY ARTS COOPERATIVE
  • Who funds KOESTER HOUSE MUSEUM FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds WATERVILLE PRESERVATION SOCIETY
  • Who funds USD 364 FOUNDATION
  • Who funds RSVP OF NORTHEAST KANSAS INC
  • Who funds MARYSVILLE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • Who funds MARSHALL COUNTY PARTNERSHIP FOR GROWTH INC
  • Who funds CATHOLIC CHARITIES 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.

Greater Manhattan Community FoundationKS23.9× affinity9 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Greater Manhattan Community Foundation · R L & Elsa Helvering Estate Trust · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Guise-Weber Foundation Inc 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
202122232425
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%your share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Guise-Weber Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to The Guise-Weber Foundation 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 71 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph