Skip to content
Wilhelms Family Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Wilhelms Family Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$20k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$10k
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, FY2020 to 2025.

Arts & Culture$187kEducation$22kReligion$15kAnimals$6kHealth$5kHousing & Shelter$3kRecreation & Sports$3kEnvironment$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k6 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$1,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$290k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MILWAUKEE ART MUSEUM$10,000
WI TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION INC$5,000
MILWAUKEE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA INC$1,500
MILWAUKEE LATVIAN EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN HOLY TRINITY CHURCH$1,000
SCHOLL COMMUNITY IMPACT GROUP$1,000
MILWAUKEE RESCUE MISSION$500
INTERLOCHEN CENTER OF THE ARTS$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, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%SCHOLL COMMUNITY IMPACT GROUP: $1k → 10%SCHOLL COMMUNITY IMPACT GROUP: $1k → 10%SCHOLL COMMUNITY IMPACT GROUP: $1k → 10%SCHOLL COMMUNITY IMPACT GROUP: $1k → 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.
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.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$212k · 10 repeat orgs$29k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +27% since the first grant, against +14% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
14

Total granted

$212k
$29k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+27%
+14%

Still filing today

60%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
Arts & CultureAnimalsHuman ServicesPhilanthropyPublic BenefitHealthOther
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

  • MA
    MILWAUKEE ART MUSEUM INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $166k · revenue +27%
  • SC
    SCHOLL COMMUNITY IMPACT GROUP INC
    4× · 2020–2025 · $4k · revenue +51%
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF MILWAUKEE AREA DOMESTIC ANIMAL CONTROL COMMISSION INC
    2× · 2020–2024 · $2k · revenue +481%

Funded once

  • THE UWM FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2022 · $20k · revenue -14%
  • LP
    LAKE PARK FRIENDS LTD
    one grant, 2020 · $2k · revenue -18%
  • WP
    WILDERNESS PEDALERS INC
    one grant, 2024 · $1k · revenue -6%
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
Missaukee Humane Society

Humane treatement of animals

Animals
2
Milwaukee Audubon Society Inc

Protect and restore Wisconsin's natural heritage and ecology through active leadership, education and stewardship

Environment
3
Wisconsin Museum of Nature and Culture

WMNC will continue constructing the new Milwaukee Public Museum facility to completion and will then continue as the owner and operator of the new museum.

Arts & Culture
4
Zoological Society of Milwaukee Endowment Trust

To provide support & funding for the mission of the zoological society of milwaukee & the milwaukee county zoo.

Animals
5
Milwaukee Public Museum Endowment Fund

Supporting the charitable, scientific and educational purposes of the milwaukee public museum.

—
6
Madison Art Gallery
—
7
Milwaukee Public Museum Inc

The milwaukee public museum inspires curiosity, excites minds and increases desire to preserve and protect our world's natural and cultural diversity through exhibitions, educational programs, collections and research.

Arts & Culture
8
Mathematics Institute of Wisconsin Co Kathryn Leverenz
Education
9
Markesan Historical Society
—
10
Zoological Society of Milwaukee Cty

The mission of the zoological society is to take part in conserving wildlife and endangered species, to educate people about the importance of wildlife and the environment, and to support the milwaukee county zoo.

Animals
11
Wisconsin Horse Alliance
—
12
Wisconsin Academy of Sciences Arts and Letters

To cultivate civil discourse, increase understanding, and create common ground by connecting wisconsin people and ideas.

Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Milwaukee Art Museum Inc; the most unlike its peers is Happy Endings No-Kill Cat Shelter. 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

17 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. 17 of the 25 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
9/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MILWAUKEE ART MUSEUM INC: $165,800 · Arts & CultureMILWAUKEE ART MUSEUM INCWISCONSIN TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION INC: $10,000 · Arts & CultureWISCONSIN TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION INC+5 more: $10,600 · Arts & Culture+5 moreMILWAUKEE LATVIAN EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN HOLY TRINITY CHURCH: $14,500 · OtherMILWAUKEE L…MILWAUKEE RESCUE MISSION: $3,000 · OtherMILWAUKEE R…SCHLITZ AUDUBON NATURE CENTER: $2,000 · OtherSCHLITZ AUD…WI HUMANE SOCIETY: $2,000 · OtherWI HUMANE S…CATO INSTITUTE: $1,000 · OtherAMERICAN AUTOIMMUNE RELATED DISEASES ASSOCIATION: $1,000 · Other+4 more: $1,500 · Other+4 moreTHE UWM FOUNDATION INC: $20,000 · EducationTHE UWM FO…HILLSDALE COLLEGE: $2,000 · EducationHILLSDALE …SCHOLL COMMUNITY IMPACT GROUP INC: $4,000 · Human ServicesFRIENDS OF MILWAUKEE AREA DOMESTIC ANIMAL CONTROL COMMISSION INC: $2,000 · AnimalsHUMANE SOCIETY OF VILAS COUNTY: $500 · AnimalsHappy Endings No-Kill Cat Shelter: $500 · AnimalsLAKE PARK FRIENDS LTD: $1,500 · PhilanthropyWILDERNESS PEDALERS INC: $1,000 · Community Improvement
Arts & Culture$186,400Other$25,000Education$22,000Human Services$4,000Animals$3,000Philanthropy$1,500Community Improvement$1,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMILWAUKEE ART MUSEUM INC: $165,800 over 6y, 0.5% of budgetTHE UWM FOUNDATION INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWISCONSIN TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION INC: $10,000 over 2y, 3.9% of budgetMILWAUKEE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA INC: $5,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetSCHOLL COMMUNITY IMPACT GROUP INC: $4,000 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetINTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $3,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetHILLSDALE COLLEGE: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF MILWAUKEE AREA DOMESTIC ANIMAL CONTROL COMMISSION INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetLAKE PARK FRIENDS LTD: $1,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetWILDERNESS PEDALERS INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCATO INSTITUTE: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVILLA TERRACE MUSEUM AND GARDENS LTD: $1,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetNORTH POINT LIGHTHOUSE FRIENDS INC: $1,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetAMERICAN AUTOIMMUNE RELATED DISEASES ASSOCIATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF VILAS COUNTY: $500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetHappy Endings No-Kill Cat Shelter: $500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetWILDERNESS VETERANS MEMORIAL FLAME FOUNDATION INC: $100 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

Baird Foundation IncNational Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Baird Foundation IncWI11.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Baird Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · 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 Wilhelms Family Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Wilhelms Family Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%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
    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 · 0–5%
    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 25 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 Wilhelms Family’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