Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Wisconsin Association for Runaway Services Inc

United to prevent and end youth homelessness in wisconsin.

$21k
Granted FY2020
4
Grants FY2020
1
States reached
$5k
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 FY20172020.

Housing & Shelter$709kYouth Development$21k
02FY2020 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$5,249
Median grant
1
States reached
$337k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE YOUTH AND FAMILY PROJECT INC$5,250
FAMILY SERVICES OF NORTHEAST WISCONSIN INC$5,249
THE BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF THE FOX VALLEY$5,249
LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF WISCONSIN AND UPPER MICHIGAN INC$5,249
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 (FY17–20, $606k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 56% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%THE YOUTH AND FAMILY PROJECT INC: $16k → 6%THE BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF THE FOX VALLEY: $16k → 7%Kenosha Human Development Services Inc: $13k → 10%FAMILY CRISIS CENTER: $44k → 10%POSITIVE ALTERNATIVES INC: $43k → 11%LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF WISCONSIN AND UPPER MICHIGAN INC: $143k → 17%THE YOUTH AND FAMILY PROJECT INC: $5k → 6%THE BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF THE FOX VALLEY: $5k → 7%KENOSHA HUMAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INC: $13k → 10%Family Crisis Center: $44k → 10%Positive Alternatives Inc: $43k → 11%Lutheran Social Services of Wisconsin and Upper Michigan Inc: $143k → 17%FAMILY CRISIS CENTER: $11k → 10%POSITIVE ALTERNATIVES INC: $11k → 11%LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF WISCONSIN AND UPPER MICHIGAN INC: $51k → 17%LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF WISCONSIN AND UPPER MICHIGAN INC: $5k → 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.

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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$730k · 8 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

8 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2020, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
0

Total granted

$730k
$0

Still filing today

88%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2020, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20
RenewedFirst-time

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

  • LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF WISCONSIN AND UPPER MICHIGAN INC
    4× · 2017–2020 · $342k · revenue +60%
  • CS
    CAP SERVICES INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $99k · revenue +3%
  • PA
    POSITIVE ALTERNATIVES INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $97k · revenue +52%

Funded once

    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
    Innovative Services Inc

    Innovative services, inc. (isi) cares for those with disabilities, helping them lead fulfilling lives with maximum independence. innovative's vision is to be the most trusted care provider for people with disabilities in wisconsin.

    Human Services
    2
    Pathways of Wisconsin Inc

    Pathways of wisconsin provides supported employment opportunities and empowerment through quality, person-centered programming for individuals of all abilities.

    Human Services
    3
    Lutheran Counseling and Family Services

    Lutheran counseling and family services of wisconsin provides faith-based mental health counseling, family life education and adoption services.

    Human Services
    4
    Lincoln Behavioral Services

    To provide comprehensive outpatient mental health services to over 5400 individuals and their families in a consumer driven person centered delivery system. Approximately 15% of our staff members are our clients who are involved in a…

    Health
    5
    Family Works Programs Inc

    Provider of treatment foster care for children and youth with complex needs.

    Human Services
    6
    Family Service Inc

    To provide family and individual counseling

    7
    Kenosha Community Health Center Inc

    Kenosha community health center, inc.'s purpose is to provide primary care and referral health services to disadvantaged and underserved populations and promote and ensure that basic primary health services are accessible to uninsured and…

    Health
    8
    Northwest Passage Ltd

    None

    Health
    9
    Center for Community Resources Inc

    To coordinate services among private and government agencies for specialized populations to ensure service continuity, reduce duplication, and assist individuals and families in accessing appropriate mental health, intellectual…

    Health
    10
    Wisconsin Family Ties Inc

    Wisconsin family ties changes lives by improving children's mental health. it accomplishes this mission through a set of interrelated activities that support and educate parents, and inform practitioners, policy makers and the public about…

    11
    Northwest Wisconsin Concentrated Employment Program Inc

    Our mission at northwest cep is to create connections that will empower individuals and groups to drive workforce and community growth.

    Employment
    12
    Neighborhood Housing Services of Southeast Wisconsin Inc

    The purpose of neighborhood housing services of southeast wisconsin, inc. is to renew pride, restore confidence,promote reinvestment, and revitalize the nhs neighborhoods through the efforts of local residents acting in concert with…

    Housing & Shelter

    For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Kenosha Human Development Services Inc and the most unlike its peers is Boys & Girls Club Fox Valley Inc. 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, 2017–2024.

    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 20172024, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover.

    0
    Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
    2
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    7/8
    Grantees still filing
    7/8
    Grew since you first funded

    Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

    LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF WISCONSIN AND UPPER MICHIGAN INC — $341,771 · Human ServicesLUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF WISCONSIN AND UPPER MICHIGAN INCCAP SERVICES INC — $98,960 · Human ServicesCAP SERVICES INCPOSITIVE ALTERNATIVES INC — $97,084 · Human ServicesPOSITIVE ALTERNATIVES INCFAMILY SERVICES OF NORTHEAST WI INC — $68,807 · Human ServicesFAMILY SERVICES OF NORTHEAST WI INCKENOSHA HUMAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INC — $26,456 · Human Services+2 more — $41,995 · Human Services+2 moreCOMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES INC — $54,719 · Other
    Human Services$675,073Other$54,719

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

    25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetLUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF WISCONSIN AND UPPER MICHIGAN INC — $341,771 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetCAP SERVICES INC — $98,960 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetPOSITIVE ALTERNATIVES INC — $97,084 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetFAMILY SERVICES OF NORTHEAST WI INC — $68,807 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetCOMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES INC — $54,719 over 3y, 20% of budgetKENOSHA HUMAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INC — $26,456 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE YOUTH AND FAMILY PROJECT INC — $20,998 over 2y, 4.7% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUB FOX VALLEY INC — $20,997 over 2y, 0.2% 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 TrustMN17.3× affinity6 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: Otto Bremer Trust · Wisconsin Balance of State Continuum of Care Inc · Green Bay Packers Foundation · Baird Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Wisconsin Association for Runaway Services 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
    2021222324
    no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government
      no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
      0get no government money at all
      2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
      0rely on government for over half their income
      ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
      typical government reliance, FY2024

      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 8 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 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

      Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2020, the most recent year this funder made grants.

      Source object · view filing

      More from the funding graph