Skip to content

· Private foundation

William F and Mary Louise Wischmeyer Philanthropic Fund

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$450k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$250k
Largest
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.

Recreation & Sports$1.3MEducation$285kReligion$100kHuman Services$65kArts & Culture$5kHousing & Shelter$1kInternational$1k
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $50k–250k2 grants · $200k
  • $250k+1 grant · $250k
$100,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LIFT FOR LIFE ACADEMY$250,000
FOREST PARK FOREVER$100,000
WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY$100,000
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 (FY18–18, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF WI & UPPER MI INC: $5k → 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.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.5M · 4 repeat orgs$212k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +149% since the first grant, against +6% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
5

Total granted

$1.5M
$112k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+149%
+6%

Still filing today

100%
60%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $100k 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
Recreation & SportsEducationEnvironmentHuman ServicesHousing & ShelterInternationalOther
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

  • LF
    LIFT FOR LIFE ACADEMY INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $1.1M · revenue +149%
  • WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY
    4× · 2019–2025 · $285k · revenue +44%
  • TT
    The Tower Grove Park Foundation
    2× · 2019–2021 · $125k · revenue +216%

Funded once

  • CL
    CHRIST LUTHERAN CHURCH OF WEBSTER GROVES
    one grant, 2024 · $100k
  • LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF WISCONSIN AND UPPER MICHIGAN INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $5k · revenue +50%
  • MT
    MUNICIPAL THEATRE ASSOCIATION OF ST LOUIS (THE MUNY)
    one grant, 2021 · $5k
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
University of Iowa Facilities Corporation

The university of iowa facilities corporation acquires and holds property for the benefit and use of the university of iowa.

—
2
Missouri Western State University Foundation Inc

The missouri western state university foundation is a not-for-profit charitable organization that functions solely to support the mission of missouri western state university, as stated in the university's mission statement. the foundation…

—
3
University of Louisville Real Estate Foundation Inc

To acquire, maintain, improve, leverage, manage, lease, and convey real and personal property for the benefit of the university of louisville.

Philanthropy
4
Furman University

The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.

Education
5
University of Illinois Foundation

The Foundation, a 501(c)(3) charitable organization, is an independent and separate nonprofit entity from the University of Illinois. Our mission is to encourage and administer private gifts and serve the UI System by working closely with…

Education
6
Lake Forest Graduate School of Management

Lake Forest Graduate School of Management's mission is to bring the real world to business education and leadership development.

—
7
Washburn University Foundation

The Foundation was created to assist in the promotion, development and enhancement of the financial resources for Washburn University of Topeka, as well as to receive and hold in trust any assets given in benefit of the University.

Education
8
Columbia College

Columbia college improves lives by providing quality education to both traditional and nontraditional students, helping them achieve their true potential.

Education
9
Federation of State Medical Boards of the United States Inc

The fsmb serves as the voice for state medical boards, supporting them through education, assessment, research and advocacy while providing services and initiatives that promote patient safety, quality health care and regulatory best…

Health
10
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…

—
11
Ecumen

We empower individuals and families to confidently navigate aging so that it is a purposeful journey filled with dignity and support.

—
12
Lake Forest College

Provide post-secondary education leading to a baccalaureate degree. Program service expenditures are made in conjunction with the operation of a liberal arts college spread over 107 acres with approximately 63 educational and support…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Forest Park Forever Inc; the most unlike its peers is Washington University. 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

8 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. 8 of the 10 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
8/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LIFT FOR LIFE ACADEMY INC: $1,075,500 · Recreation & SportsLIFT FOR LIFE ACADEMY INCThe Tower Grove Park Foundation: $125,000 · OtherThe Tower Grove Pa…CHRIST LUTHERAN CHURCH OF WEBSTER GROVES: $100,000 · OtherCHRIST LUTHERAN CH…LUTHERAN FAMILY AND CHILDREN'S SERVICES OF MISSOURI: $60,000 · OtherLUTHERAN FAMILY AN…+1 more: $5,000 · OtherWASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $285,000 · EducationWASHINGTON UNIVERS…Forest Park Forever Inc: $100,000 · EnvironmentLUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF WISCONSIN AND UPPER MICHIGAN INC: $5,000 · Human ServicesUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $1,000 · InternationalBEYOND HOUSING INC: $1,000 · Housing & Shelter
Recreation & Sports$1,075,500Other$290,000Education$285,000Environment$100,000Human Services$5,000International$1,000Housing & Shelter$1,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetLIFT FOR LIFE ACADEMY INC: $1,075,500 over 9y, 1.8% of budgetWASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $285,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetThe Tower Grove Park Foundation: $125,000 over 2y, 5.5% of budgetLUTHERAN FAMILY AND CHILDREN'S SERVICES OF MISSOURI: $60,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetLUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF WISCONSIN AND UPPER MICHIGAN INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBEYOND HOUSING INC: $1,000 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.

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.

Vanguard Charitable Endowment ProgramPA10× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 William F and Mary Louise Wischmeyer Philanthropic Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from William F and Mary Louise Wischmeyer Philanthropic Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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 10 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 William F and Mary Louise Wischmeyer Philanthropic’s filings →

    More from the funding graph