Skip to content
United Methodist Children's Services of Wisconsin Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

United Methodist Children's Services of Wisconsin Inc

Our mission is to cultivate a vibrant and resilient neighborhood by fostering connections, nuturing local talent, and empowering every member to contribute to the growth and well-being of our community.

$311k
Granted FY2024still arriving
9
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$51k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2022 to 2024.

Community Improvement$676kHousing & Shelter$142k
02FY2024 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k8 grants · $260k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $51k
$31,168
Median grant
1
States reached
$7.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SHERMAN PARK COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION INC$51,284
VIA CDC$41,288
RIVERWORKS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION$38,876
NEAR WEST SIDE PARTNERS$35,944
DOMINICAN CENTER FOR WOMEN INC$31,168
SOUTHSIDE ORGANIZING COMMITTEE$29,000
WALNUT WAY CONSERVATION CORP$28,636
MILWAUKEE CHRISTIAN CENTER$28,422
CLARKE SQUARE NEIGHBORHOOD INITIATIVE$26,348
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 (FY22–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 17%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 17%VIA CDC: $41k → 17%VIA CDC: $35k → 17%SOUTHSIDE ORGANIZING COMMITTEE: $29k → 17%VIA CDC: $20k → 17%SOUTHSIDE ORGANIZING COMMITTEE: $15k → 17%DOMINICAN CENTER FOR WOMEN INC: $31k → 17%DOMINICAN CENTER FOR WOMEN INC: $27k → 17%DOMINICAN CENTER FOR WOMEN INC: $17k → 17%WALNUT WAY CONSERVATION CORP: $29k → 17%WALNUT WAY CONSERVATION CORP: $17k → 17%WALNUT WAY CONSERVATION CORP: $14k → 17%SHERMAN PARK COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION INC: $60k → 17%SHERMAN PARK COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION INC: $51k → 17%SHERMAN PARK COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION INC: $35k → 17%NEAR WEST SIDE PARTNERS: $36k → 17%MILWAUKEE CHRISTIAN CENTER: $28k → 17%NEAR WEST SIDE PARTNERS: $35k → 17%MILWAUKEE CHRISTIAN CENTER: $27k → 17%NEAR WEST SIDE PARTNERS: $27k → 17%MILWAUKEE CHRISTIAN CENTER: $27k → 17%CLARKE SQUARE NEIGHBORHOOD INITIATIVE: $57k → 17%CLARKE SQUARE NEIGHBORHOOD INITIATIVE: $26k → 17%RIVERWORKS DEVELOPENT CORPORATION: $60k → 17%RIVERWORKS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $39k → 17%RIVERWORKS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $35k → 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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$818k · 9 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
0

Total granted

$818k
$0

Still filing today

100%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24
Community ImprovementHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • SP
    SHERMAN PARK COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $146k · revenue +41%
  • NW
    NEAR WEST SIDE PARTNERS INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $98k · revenue +31%
  • LAYTON BOULEVARD WEST NEIGHBORS INC DBA VIA CDC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $96k · revenue +93%

Funded once

    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
    Westside Community Development Corp
    Community Improvement
    2
    Near West Side Community Development Corporation

    To provide economic development by providing safe and affordable housing, housing counseling, employment referrals and training opportunities. organization also develops and manages properties in an effort to meet the needs of the…

    —
    3
    Southwest Collective

    Provide an open forum for southwest side residents to voice their concerns, hear new perspectives from their neighbors, learn about existing public resources, launch economic, educational, and

    Community Improvement
    4
    Neighborhood Improvement Development Corporation

    The neighborhood improvement development corporation (the corporation) is a nonprofit corporation established by the city of milwaukee, wisconsin (the city), to promote reinvestment in both housing and commercial structures within the…

    Housing & Shelter
    5
    Westside Neighborhood Developm

    Community development via home ownership and home repair programs. financial literacy education

    Community Improvement
    6
    Madison Northside Planning Council Inc

    To improve the quality of life and foster equity on the northside through community organizing and economic development.

    Community Improvement
    7
    Metro West Community Development Organization

    The mission of metro west community development organization is to revitalize our neighborhoods, celebrate our history, and strengthen collaboration, diversity, and redevelopment.

    Community Improvement
    8
    The Midtown Community Development Foundation
    Philanthropy
    9
    Neighborhood Housing Services of Southeast Wisconsin Inc

    The purpose of neighborhood housing services of southeast wisconsin, inc. is to renew pride, restore confidence,promote reinvestment, and revitalize the nhs neighborhoods through the efforts of local residents acting in concert with…

    Housing & Shelter
    10
    Milwaukee Water Commons Inc

    Milwaukee water commons is helping catalyze milwaukee as a true model water city-a place where we all have a stake in the health of our waters and all share in their stewardship and benefits. we are advancing our community envisioned water…

    Environment
    11
    Southwest Boston Community Development Corporation and Affiliates

    The southwest boston community development corporation is led by principles of racial equity and inclusion, to alleviate social and economic disparities that impact people's quality of life and future opportunities. it shall be led by and…

    Community Improvement
    12
    West Side Citizens Organization

    See schedule o.the west side community organization sustains the people of the west side to build community power and to advance more just and equitable community. wsco also serves as the planning council for st. paul's district 3 (zip…

    Community Improvement
    How this is measured
    The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Walnut Way Conservation Corporation; the most unlike its peers is Clarke Square Neighborhood Initiative in. 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 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.

    Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

    0
    Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
    2
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    9/9
    Grantees still filing
    7/9
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    SHERMAN PARK COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION INC: $145,934 · OtherSHERMAN PARK COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION INCLAYTON BOULEVARD WEST NEIGHBORS INC DBA VIA CDC: $95,788 · OtherLAYTON BOULEVARD WEST NEIGHBORS INC DBA VIA CDCDOMINICAN CENTER FOR WOMEN INC: $75,168 · OtherDOMINICAN CENTER FOR WOMEN INCSouthside Organizing Committee Inc: $44,000 · OtherSouthside Organizing Committee IncRIVERWORKS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $133,526 · Community ImprovementRIVERWORKS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONNEAR WEST SIDE PARTNERS INC: $97,944 · Community ImprovementNEAR WEST SIDE PARTNERS INCCLARKE SQUARE NEIGHBORHOOD INITIATIVE IN: $83,348 · Community ImprovementCLARKE SQUARE NEIGHBORHOOD INITIATIVE INMILWAUKEE COMMUNITY CROSSROADS INC: $82,422 · Housing & ShelterMILWAUKEE COMMUNITY…WALNUT WAY CONSERVATION CORPORATION: $59,636 · Housing & ShelterWALNUT WAY CONSERVA…
    Other$360,890Community Improvement$314,818Housing & Shelter$142,058

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

    25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSHERMAN PARK COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION INC: $145,934 over 3y, 13% of budgetRIVERWORKS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $133,526 over 3y, 2.4% of budgetNEAR WEST SIDE PARTNERS INC: $97,944 over 3y, 2.8% of budgetLAYTON BOULEVARD WEST NEIGHBORS INC DBA VIA CDC: $95,788 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetCLARKE SQUARE NEIGHBORHOOD INITIATIVE IN: $83,348 over 2y, 20% of budgetMILWAUKEE COMMUNITY CROSSROADS INC: $82,422 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetDOMINICAN CENTER FOR WOMEN INC: $75,168 over 3y, 4.4% of budgetWALNUT WAY CONSERVATION CORPORATION: $59,636 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetSouthside Organizing Committee Inc: $44,000 over 2y, 2.6% 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.

    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.

    Joseph and Vera Zilbe…United Way of Greater…Greater Milwaukee Fou…Herbert H Kohl Charit…Local Initiatives Sup…Wisconsin Voices IncGreater Green Bay Com…Otto Bremer TrustGreen Bay Packers Fou…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
    Joseph and Vera Zilber Family Foundation IncWI24.1× affinity9 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: Joseph and Vera Zilber Family Foundation Inc · United Way of Greater Milwaukee & Waukesha County Inc · Greater Milwaukee Foundation Inc · Herbert H Kohl Charities Inc · Local Initiatives Support Corporation · Wisconsin Voices Inc · Greater Green Bay Community Foundation Inc · Otto Bremer Trust · Green Bay Packers Foundation · 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 United Methodist Children's Services of Wisconsin Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from United Methodist Children's Services of Wisconsin Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

    2024
    ’20’21’22’23’24’25
    no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
      no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
      0get no government money at all
      5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
      0rely on government for over half their income
      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 9 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

      Source object · view filing

      Play a game based on United Methodist Children's Services of Wisconsin’s filings →

      More from the funding graph

      The unnamed billions
      grants reported with no recipient in the public record
      The regranting layer
      51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
      The DAF merry-go-round
      $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
      The endowment market
      who holds foundation money, and what just moved
      The camps
      funders cluster by geography, not ideology
      By state
      where grant money is based, and what stays home