Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Karol Fund

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$245k
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$50k
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, FY2020 to 2025.

Religion$1.4MEducation$308kHuman Services$55kHousing & Shelter$18kYouth Development$5kOther$0
02FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $20k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $175k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$20,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$134k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ST FRANCIS DE SALES SEMINARY - ANNUAL APPEAL$50,000
ARCHDIOCESE OF MILWAUKEE - STEWARDSHIP APPEAL$40,000
ARCHDIOCESE OF MILWAUKEE - LOVE ONE ANOTHER CAPITAL CAMPAIGN$30,000
SETON CATHOLIC SCHOOLS$25,000
MILWAUKEE CATHOLIC HOME$25,000
BOSTON COLLEGE - INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED JESUIT STUDIES$25,000
DIVINE SAVIOR HOLY ANGELS - FORWARD IN FAITH CAPITAL CAMPAIGN$20,000
ARCHDIOCESE OF MILWAUKEE - CATHOLIC SCHOOLS DINNER$10,000
ST JOSEPHAT BASILICA FOUNDATION$5,000
GREENSBURG CENTRAL CATHOLIC SCHOOL$5,000
WOMEN'S SUPPORT CENTER OF MILWAUKEE$5,000
MILWAUKEE RESCUE MISSION$2,500
ST ANTHONY SCHOOL$2,500
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:

Its human-services grants (FY20–25, $55k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%WOMEN'S SUPPORT CENTER OF MILWAUKEE: $5k → 17%WOMEN'S SUPPORT CENTER OF MILWAUKEE: $5k → 17%WOMEN'S SUPPORT CENTER OF MILWAUKEE: $5k → 17%WOMEN'S SUPPORT CENTER OF MILWAUKEE: $5k → 17%WOMEN'S SUPPORT CENTER OF MILWAUKEE: $5k → 17%WOMEN'S SUPPORT CENTER OF MILWAUKEE: $5k → 17%MILWAUKEE CATHOLIC HOME: $25k → 17%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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

64%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.2M · 15 repeat orgs$685k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +153% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

15 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
11

Total granted

$1.2M
$650k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+153%
0%

Still filing today

13%
27%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $35k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
ReligionHuman ServicesOther
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

  • SF
    ST FRANCIS DE SALES SEMINARY - ANNUAL APPEAL
    4× · 2022–2025 · $298k
  • AO
    ARCHDIOCESE OF MILWAUKEE - STEWARDSHIP APPEAL
    4× · 2022–2025 · $160k
  • SC
    SETON CATHOLIC SCHOOLS
    6× · 2020–2025 · $150k

Funded once

  • TS
    THE SALESIANUM TRUST
    one grant, 2024 · $500k
  • VO
    VALLEY OF OUR LADY MONASTERY
    one grant, 2021 · $25k
  • SF
    ST FRANCIS OF ASSISI - CAPITAL CAMPAIGN
    one grant, 2021 · $25k
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
04the grantee network

6 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. 6 of the 28 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/6
Grantees still filing
4/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE SALESIANUM TRUST: $500,000 · OtherTHE SALESIANUM TRUSTST FRANCIS DE SALES SEMINARY - ANNUAL APPEAL: $297,500 · OtherST FRANCIS DE SALES SEMINARY - ANNUAL APPEALARCHDIOCESE OF MILWAUKEE - STEWARDSHIP APPEAL: $160,000 · OtherARCHDIOCESE OF MILWAUKEE - STEWARDSHIP APPEALSETON CATHOLIC SCHOOLS: $150,000 · OtherSETON CATHOLIC SCHOOLSARCHDIOCESE OF MILWAUKEE - LOVE ONE ANOTHER CAPITAL CAMPAIGN: $150,000 · OtherARCHDIOCESE OF MILWAUKEE - LOVE ONE ANOTHER CAPITAL CAMPAIGNIndividual grant recipient: $110,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCURSILLO IN CHRISTIANITY OF THE ARC HDIOCESE OF MILWAUKEE: $80,000 · OtherDIVINE SAVIOR HOLY ANGELS - FORWARD IN FAITH CAPITAL CAMPAIGN: $80,000 · Other+16 more: $290,500 · Other+16 moreWOMENS SUPPORT CENTERS OF MILWAUKEE INC: $30,000 · Human ServicesMILWAUKEE CATHOLIC HOME INC: $25,000 · Human ServicesST JOSAPHAT BASILICA FOUNDATION INC: $30,000 · ReligionAHAVA PRODUCTIONS INC: $10,000 · Religion
Other$1,818,000Human Services$55,000Religion$40,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetST JOSAPHAT BASILICA FOUNDATION INC: $30,000 over 6y, 1.5% of budgetWOMENS SUPPORT CENTERS OF MILWAUKEE INC: $30,000 over 6y, 2.1% of budgetMILWAUKEE PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetAHAVA PRODUCTIONS INC: $10,000 over 1y, 7.2% of budgetYoung America's Foundation: $5,000 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 ST JOSAPHAT BASILICA FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds WOMENS SUPPORT CENTERS OF MILWAUKEE INC ↗
  • Who funds MILWAUKEE CATHOLIC HOME INC ↗
  • Who funds MILWAUKEE PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds AHAVA PRODUCTIONS INC ↗
  • Who funds Young America's Foundation ↗

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.

Greater Milwaukee Foundation IncWI15.5× affinity5 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Greater Milwaukee Foundation Inc · Evan & Marion Helfaer Foundation · Herbert H Kohl Charities Inc · Baird Foundation Inc · American Endowment Foundation · 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 The Karol Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Karol Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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 28 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 Karol’s filings →

    More from the funding graph