Skip to content
University of Wisconsin Medical Foundation Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

University of Wisconsin Medical Foundation Inc

University of Wisconsin Medical Foundation (UWMF) supports the teaching, research and service missions of the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health by promoting the delivery of excellent and innovative patient care by faculty and staff who serve local, regional, national and international populations.

$58M
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$45M
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, FY2017 to 2025.

Education$557MHealth$4.6MHuman Services$77kCommunity Improvement$65kEmployment$32kArts & Culture$5k
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $20k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $77k
  • $250k+2 grants · $57M
$24,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$823M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UW School of Medicine and Public Health$45,320,494
University of Wisconsin Foundation$12,148,726
Orthopaedic Research and Education Foundation$35,000
American Family Children's Hospital$24,000
Healthy Classrooms Foundation Inc$18,000
American Pediatric Society$8,500
YWCA Madison$6,000
American Urological Association$5,150
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 (FY21–25, $76k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Health Native Community Partnerships Inc: $10k → 22%YWCA Madison: $41k → 10%YMCA Madison: $8k → 10%YWCA MADISON: $8k → 10%YWCA Madison: $6k → 10%YWCA Madison: $5k → 10%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.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
WI
NY
PA
NJ
UT
CO
VA
MD
NM
TX
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.
$561M · 19 repeat orgs$174k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +24% since the first grant, against +18% for those funded once.

19 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 12 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
17

Total granted

$561M
$169k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+24%
+18%

Still filing today

74%
65%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
HealthEducationHuman 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

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION
    9× · 2017–2025 · $170M · revenue +39%
  • AC
    ACCESS COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS INC
    5× · 2017–2021 · $3.8M · revenue +70%
  • BT
    BREAKTHROUGH T1D
    4× · 2017–2020 · $33k · revenue +49%

Funded once

  • WT
    WISCONSIN TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION INITIATIVE INC
    one grant, 2018 · $50k · 100% of their budget
  • TS
    THE SALVATION ARMY
    one grant, 2022 · $10k
  • ND
    NAMI DANE COUNTY INCgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +81%
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
The Medical College of Wisconsin Inc

The medical college of wisconsin (mcw) is a distinguished leader and innovator in the education and development of the next generation of physicians, (continued in schedule o)

Education
2
Minnesota Medical Association

To be the leading voice of medicine to make minnesota the healthiest state and the best place to practice.

—
3
University Family Physicians Inc

Engage actively and continuously in medical research, education and training in the practice of medicine in conjunction with the department of family medicine of the indiana university school of medicine and indiana university…

—
4
Wisconsin Medical Society Inc

To improve the health of the people of wisconsin by supporting and strengthening physicians' ability to practice high quality patient care in a changing environment.

—
5
American Academy of Neurology

The Academy's mission is to enhance member career fulfillment and promote brain health for all.

Community Improvement
6
Asco Association

Asco association promotes the common business interests of its members by: (1) advocating for policies that improve the quality of cancer care; (2) maintaining the highest standards of oncology medical care through programs supporting…

Community Improvement
7
American Association of Physicists in Medicine

Advancing medicine through excellence in the science, education and professional practice of medical physics. the mission is carried out through driving scientific and clinical innovation in medical physics to improve human health,…

Science & Tech
8
Jaeb Center for Health Research Foundation Inc

Our mission is to expand scientific knowledge and improve public health by designing and conducting world-class clinical trials and epidemiologic research.

Unclassified
9
American College of Rheumatology Inc

The american college of rheumatology is an organization of and for physicians, health professionals, and scientists that advances rheumatology through programs of education, research, advocacy and practice support that foster excellence in…

—
10
American College of Radiology

The american college of radiology (acr) is organized to advance radiology science, practice and access, improve quality and safety, provide continuing education for radiology and allied professionals, and achieve better outcomes through…

Health
11
Association of American Medical Colleges

Aamc leads & serves the academic medicine community to improve the health of people everywhere.

Education
12
America's Health Insurance Plans Inc

Ahip is the national trade association representing the health insurance industry. ahip's members provide health care coverage, services and solutions to more than 200 million americans. we are committed to market-based solutions and…

Membership Benefit
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Rainbow Project Inc; the most unlike its peers is Perinatal Research Society. 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

27 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. 27 of the 37 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
26/27
Grantees still filing
14/27
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

University of Wisconsin Madison: $375,730,639 · OtherUniversity of Wisconsin Madison+17 more: $4,150,778 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION: $170,194,959 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATIONRegional Division Inc: $10,867,636 · EducationRegional Division IncOrthopaedic Research and Education Foundation: $289,000 · HealthFRIENDS OF UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN HOSPITAL AND CLINICS INC: $107,800 · HealthBREAKTHROUGH T1D: $32,950 · HealthAmerican Heart Association Inc: $25,000 · HealthWISCONSIN WOMEN'S HEALTH FOUNDATION INC: $22,500 · HealthEMBOLDEN WI INC: $21,500 · HealthNAMI National: $20,000 · Health+8 more: $61,577 · HealthYWCA MADISON INC: $66,925 · Human ServicesHealthy Native Communities Partnership I: $9,500 · Human Services
Other$379,881,417Education$181,062,595Health$580,327Human Services$76,425

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 budgetUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION: $170,194,959 over 9y, 10.0% of budgetRegional Division Inc: $10,867,636 over 4y, 15% of budgetACCESS COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS INC: $3,788,787 over 5y, 2.3% of budgetOrthopaedic Research and Education Foundation: $289,000 over 9y, 0.9% of budgetFRIENDS OF UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN HOSPITAL AND CLINICS INC: $107,800 over 3y, 7.0% of budgetYWCA MADISON INC: $66,925 over 5y, 0.6% of budgetWISCONSIN TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION INITIATIVE INC: $50,000 over 1y, 100% of budgetBREAKTHROUGH T1D: $32,950 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $25,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE AMERICAN PEDIATRIC SOCIETY INC: $24,500 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetWISCONSIN WOMEN'S HEALTH FOUNDATION INC: $22,500 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetEMBOLDEN WI INC: $21,500 over 4y, 1.1% of budgetTHE ARNOLD GOLD FOUNDATION: $21,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetNAMI National: $20,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetAmerican Liver Foundation: $12,850 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetNAMI DANE COUNTY INC: $10,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetPERINATAL RESEARCH SOCIETY: $10,000 over 1y, 16% of budgetCOMBAT BLINDNESS INTERNATIONAL INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetHealthy Native Communities Partnership I: $9,500 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR BLACK WOMEN'S WELLNESS INC: $7,577 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE RAINBOW PROJECT INC: $6,500 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetAMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION: $6,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH IN VISION AND OPHTHALMOLOGY: $5,750 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN UROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION EDUCATION AND RESEARCH INC: $5,150 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHILDREN'S THEATER OF MADISON INC: $5,134 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMEDICAL STUDENTS FOR CHOICE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetRAPE CRISIS CENTER INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% 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.

Madison Community Fou…The Roots and Wings F…Alliant Energy Founda…Madison Gas and Elect…Meriter Health Servic…United Way of Dane Co…Green Bay Packers Fou…The Evjue Foundation …Ascendium Education S…Madison Rotary Founda…The Oscar Rennebohm F…Endres Manufacturing …
Madison Community FoundationWI25.7× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Madison Community Foundation · The Roots and Wings Foundation Inc · Alliant Energy Foundation Inc · Madison Gas and Electric Foundation Inc · Meriter Health Services Inc · United Way of Dane County Inc · Green Bay Packers Foundation · The Evjue Foundation Inc · Ascendium Education Solutions Inc · Madison Rotary Foundation · The Oscar Rennebohm Foundation Inc · Endres Manufacturing Foundation Inc

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 University of Wisconsin Medical Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from University of Wisconsin Medical Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • American Urological Association Education and Research Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
10report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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 37 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on University of Wisconsin Medical’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