How much did Windhover Foundation Inc grant in FY2024?

Philanthropy$25MEducation$4.5MArts & Culture$3.6MYouth Development$1.1MCommunity Improvement$968kHuman Services$829kFood & Nutrition$365kRecreation & Sports$315kHealth$259kOther$7.4M

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2020

emergencysarahsee explanationcriminaljonathancovid responsejustice

2021

fulaa lifelinelifeline internationalmilwaukee heartpantry livesee explanationcrime historylegacy scholarship

2022

alumnistanfordbeatificationrenovationvolunteerhurricane ianian relief

2023

rubin stacycalatrava baselinevisionariesnsuinclusionfilmlecture series

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 241 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k177 grants · $468k
$10k–50k42 grants · $768k
$50k–250k19 grants · $1.5M
$250k+3 grants · $23M

$3,000

Median grant

States reached

$77M

Total assets

Largest grants

WINDERFUL FOUNDATION INC$22,747,788
MILWAUKEE ART MUSEUM INC$285,000
AIDS HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION$250,000
NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY INC$200,000
UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MILWAUKEE CORPORATION$140,500
NEW YORK UNIVERSITY$100,000
WAUKESHA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC$100,000
CHILDRENS HOSPITAL OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION INC$100,000
HUNGER TASK FORCE INC$100,000
MONTESSORI SCHOOL OF WAUKESHA INC$100,000
MILWAUKEE CHAMBER THEATRE LTD$82,500
BROWN UNIVERSITY$75,000
NATIONAL CATHOLIC CHURCH OF NORTH AMERICA INC$67,580
NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY INC$63,324
BROWN UNIVERSITY$60,000

02The need

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 (FY20–24, $829k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14% — the area typically sits at 11%. 91% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

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 line in 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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

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.

39%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$17M · 291 repeat orgs$27M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +41% since the first grant, against +28% for the ones you funded once.

291 repeat relationships — 143 still active in FY2024, 148 since wound down; 80 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

291

461

Total granted

$17M

$3.6M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+41%

+28%

Still filing today

38%

16%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 11% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $23M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EducationHuman ServicesArts & CultureHealthPhilanthropyRecreation & SportsOther

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

MA
MILWAUKEE ART MUSEUM INC
5× · 2020–2024 · $2.3M · revenue +8%
NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY INC
5× · 2020–2024 · $1.1M · revenue +23%
BU
BROWN UNIVERSITY OF PROVIDENCE
5× · 2020–2024 · $935k · revenue +19%

Funded once

GH
GREATER HORIZONSgraduated
one grant, 2023 · $1.8M · revenue +233%
IH
I HAVE A DREAM FOUNDATION -MILWAUKEE INCgraduated
one grant, 2022 · $55k · revenue +963%
AO
ARCHDIOCESE OF MIAMI
one grant, 2020 · $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.

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

Milwaukee Development Corporation

Regional economic development

Community Improvement

The Uwm Real Estate Foundation Inc

To partner with the public and private sectors to develop and hold real estate for the benefit of the university of wisconsin-milwaukee. the uwm real estate foundation, inc. holdings may include any properties that advance the mission of…

Housing & Shelter

Uwm Research Foundation Inc

Support research and innovation at the university of wisconsin - milwaukee by providing funding for scholarships and grants and by engaging in corporate partnering activities to that end.

Community Improvement

Minneapolis College of Art and Design

Embolden creative leaders to transform society through equity, empathy, & imagination.

Education

Milwaukee Women Inc

Milwaukee women inc. is dedicated to promoting and providing research and education concerning the value of diversity in corporate governance and management and eliminating barriers to full inclusion of women in leadership positions.

Education

Radio Milwaukee Inc

Through music and stories created for a culturally open- minded community, radio milwaukee, inc. is a catalyst for creating a better, more inclusive, and engaged milwaukee.

Arts & Culture

Milwaukee World Festival Inc

The mission of milwaukee world festival, inc. is to promote an understanding of different ethnic cultures, the histories and traditions of various nationalities, harmony in the community, civic pride and provide a showcase for the…

Arts & Culture

University of Wisconsin - Green Bay

The foundation exists to support the university of wisconsin - green bay in its quest to provide an education to all who seek one. this is done through scholarship, research support, capital acquisitions, and investing in the staff and…

Education

Milwaukee School of Engineering

Milwaukee school of engineering (the "university") is a nonprofit, nonsectarian university providing a balanced education at the undergraduate and graduate level for men and women in the disciplines of engineering, business, mathematics,…

Education

Beloit College

Beloit college is a residential, independent, national liberal arts college and wisconsin's oldest continuous institution of higher learning. the college is a national leader in delivering a rigorous, time-tested liberal arts experience…

Education

University of New Haven

See schedule ouniversity of new haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts & professional education.

Education

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Covenant House Florida Inc and the most unlike its peers is Regis University. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 39 years old; the field is 21. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 58% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.9% lost their exemption, against 8% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.9%2/232

the rest of the field

1,866/22,213

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

05the grantee network

202 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

197/202

Grantees still filing

156/202

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Philanthropy$24,938,621Other$8,385,222Education$4,475,946Arts & Culture$3,558,562Youth Development$1,131,265Community Improvement$967,500Human Services$828,672

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

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.

Greater Milwaukee Foundation IncWI84.3× affinity55 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Greater Milwaukee Foundation Inc · United Way of Greater Milwaukee & · Herbert H Kohl Charities Inc · Green Bay Packers Foundation · Milwaukee Jewish Federation Inc · Evan & Marion Helfaer Foundation · Ralph Evinrude Foundation Inc · Waukesha County Community Foundation · Brewers Community Foundation Inc · Youth Foundation Inc · Baird Foundation Inc · The Galaxy Foundation Inc

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 organisation Windhover Foundation 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

32get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: MILWAUKEE GAY SPORTS NETWORK.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

low risk

7 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 811021791 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on MILWAUKEE GAY SPORTS NETWORK, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
WatchSustained operations— Filing through 2023; revenue contracted over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 98% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Windhover Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Windhover Foundation Inc through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

Windhover Foundation Inc

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

202 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Windhover Foundation Inc?

More from the funding graph

Windhover Foundation Inc

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

202 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Windhover Foundation Inc?

More from the funding graph