Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Wbd Inc

Wbd is a business finance resource that provides the knowledge, services and access to capital needed to create jobs, grow businesses and build communities.

$569k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$150k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

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

Community Improvement$1.5MEmployment$350kEducation$50kHuman Services$45kMembership Benefit$13k
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 8 grants below total $530,760 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $569,065 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $38,305 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $66k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $465k
$50,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$23M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WISCONSIN VETERANS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE INC$150,000
WISCONSIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION INC$100,000
WISCONSIN WOMENS BUSINESS INITIATIVE CORPORATION$64,760
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN - EAU CLAIRE FOUNDATION INC$50,000
FAMILY FRIENDLY WORKPLACES INC$50,000
SHAKOPEE CHAMBER FOUNDATION$50,000
CHAYIL INC$45,000
NEW NORTH INC$21,000
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 (FY25–25, $45k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CHAYIL INC: $45k → 17%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.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 13% of Wbd Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 77% of the giving stays in WI; read by stated purpose it is 69% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

Wbd Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 5.1% directed abroad (not shown)

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

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.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.5M · 6 repeat orgs$468k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +43% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
8

Total granted

$1.5M
$273k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+43%
0%

Still filing today

83%
63%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 63% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $195k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’24’25
Community ImprovementEmploymentEducationYouth DevelopmentHuman ServicesOther

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

  • WW
    WISCONSIN WOMEN'S BUSINESS INITIATIVE CORPORATION
    7× · 2017–2025 · $365k · revenue +43%
  • WE
    WISCONSIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION INC
    4× · 2020–2025 · $337k · revenue +15% · 36% of their budget
  • NE
    NORTHEAST ENTREPRENEUR FUND INC
    3× · 2020–2022 · $300k · revenue +106%

Funded once

  • HA
    HMONG AMERICAN PARTNERSHIP
    one grant, 2024 · $50k · revenue 0%
  • FF
    FOR-M FOUNDATION INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $50k · revenue 0%
  • MC
    MIDDLETON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2024 · $50k

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
Northwest Wisconsin Workforce Investment Board Inc

The northwest wisconsin workforce investment board (nwwib) will create, and continue to improve, an innovative and quality strategic direction for the regional workforce development system.

Public Benefit
2
Wisconsin Center for Manufacturing & Productivity

The wcmp will grow and nurture the mep's impact in the state of wisconsin by engaging and aligning the best possible resources to help small and medium-sized manufacturers reach their potential.

Education
3
Area Partnership for Economic Expansion

Promote and develop economic expansion in duluth and northeastern mn and northwestern wisconsin. the organization leads regional research efforts related to human resources, and emerging industries to inform business development and…

Community Improvement
4
Develop America Inc

Develop wisconsin builds and develops business development ecosystems to more effectively and efficiently provide business owners with the resources, support, networks and access to markets that they need to grow. communities with vibrant…

Public Benefit
5
Wisconsin Progress Inc

Wisconsin progress recruits, trains, elects, and develops progressive candidates and leaders at the local and state legislative levels.

Civil Rights
6
Wisconsin Technology Council Inc

To lead wisconsin in development and retention of science and tech-based businesses and to provide policy guidance to lawmakers, the governor of wisconsin, state agencies, and other institutions.

Community Improvement
7
Wausau Region Chamber of Commerce Inc

To strengthen our member businesses and enhance our community by building business success.

8
Waukesha County Center for Growth Inc

To serve as the central point of contact for businesses looking to grow in waukesha county.

Community Improvement
9
Minnesota Chamber of Commerce and Industry

The minnesota chamber of commerce proactively leads the business community statewide to: advance pro-business, responsible minnesota public policy that creates jobs and grows the econony; provde member services to address evolving business…

10
Hmong Wisconsin Chamber of Commerce Inc

Hwcc is a community development financial institution (cdfi) providing economic development assistance in business planning, market analysis, marketing strategies, effective day-to-day business operations and much more. hwcc acts as an…

Community Improvement
11
Wisconsin Policy Forum Inc

We conduct impartial public policy research and analysis to drive informed debate and effective decision-making in the state of wisconsin.

Public Benefit
12
Wisconsin Manufacturing Extension Partnership Inc

Wisconsin manufacturing extension partnership, inc. optimizes stakeholder value for wisconsin manufacturers by expanding their capabilities to grow, be innovative, and achieve operational success.

Education

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wisconsin Women's Business Initiative Corporation and the most unlike its peers is Chayil Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

05the grantee network

18 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/18
Grantees still filing
9/18
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

WISCONSIN WOMEN'S BUSINESS INITIATIVE CORPORATION — $364,760 · OtherWISCONSIN WOMEN'S BUSINESS INITIATIVE CORPORATIONWISCONSIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION INC — $337,000 · OtherWISCONSIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION INCNORTHEAST ENTREPRENEUR FUND INC — $300,000 · OtherNORTHEAST ENTREPRENEUR FUND INCWISCONSIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION — $155,000 · OtherWISCONSIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONMIDDLETON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOUNDATION INC — $50,000 · Other+3 more — $68,000 · Other+3 moreWisconsin Veterans Chamber of Commerce Inc — $250,000 · Community ImprovementWisconsin Veterans Chamber …NEW NORTH INC — $75,000 · Community ImprovementNEW NORTH INCFAMILY FRIENDLY WORKPLACES INC — $50,000 · Community ImprovementFAMILY FRIENDLY WORKPLACES …FOR-M FOUNDATION INC — $50,000 · Community ImprovementFOR-M FOUNDATION INCDULUTH AREA CHAMBER FOUNDATION — $50,000 · Community ImprovementDULUTH AREA CHAMBER FOUNDAT…+1 more — $5,000 · Community ImprovementHMONG AMERICAN PARTNERSHIP — $50,000 · EmploymentUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN - EAU CLAIRE FOUNDATION INC — $50,000 · EducationSHAKOPEE CHAMBER FOUNDATION — $50,000 · Youth DevelopmentChayil Inc — $45,000 · Human Services
Other$1,274,760Community Improvement$480,000Employment$50,000Education$50,000Youth Development$50,000Human Services$45,000

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 budgetWISCONSIN WOMEN'S BUSINESS INITIATIVE CORPORATION — $364,760 over 7y, 1.0% of budgetWISCONSIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION INC — $337,000 over 4y, 36% of budgetNORTHEAST ENTREPRENEUR FUND INC — $300,000 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetWisconsin Veterans Chamber of Commerce Inc — $250,000 over 2y, 10% of budgetNEW NORTH INC — $75,000 over 6y, 1.2% of budgetHMONG AMERICAN PARTNERSHIP — $50,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN - EAU CLAIRE FOUNDATION INC — $50,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetFAMILY FRIENDLY WORKPLACES INC — $50,000 over 2y, 26% of budgetFOR-M FOUNDATION INC — $50,000 over 2y, 6.8% of budgetDULUTH AREA CHAMBER FOUNDATION — $50,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetChayil Inc — $45,000 over 1y, 48% of budgetWISCONSIN BANKERS ASSOCIATION — $13,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetWISCONSIN RURAL PARTNERS INC — $5,000 over 1y, 27% 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.

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.

Otto Bremer TrustMN12.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Otto Bremer 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 Wbd 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%3%13%28%50%your share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    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.

    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 18 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 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