Skip to content
Wisconsin Association for Runaway Services Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· 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 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, FY2017 to 2020.

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

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$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
LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF WISCONSIN AND UPPER MICHIGAN INC$5,249
THE BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF THE FOX VALLEY$5,249
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 (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 its 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
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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has 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
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

  • 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 +82%

Funded once

    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
    Family Service Agency of Waukesha County Inc

    Building stronger communities, strengthening families, and empowering individuals through compassionate, life changing programs and behavioral health services.

    Human Services
    2
    Innovative Services Inc

    Innovative services, inc. (innovative care services) 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…

    Human Services
    3
    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
    4
    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
    5
    Family Works Programs Inc

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

    Human Services
    6
    Disability Rights Wisconsin Inc

    Legal protection and advocacy to protect the rights of people with disabilities in wisconsin.

    —
    7
    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
    8
    Northwest Passage Ltd

    None

    Health
    9
    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
    10
    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
    11
    Family Service Inc

    To provide family and individual counseling

    —
    12
    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
    How this is measured
    The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Positive Alternatives Inc; 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, 2017–2025.

    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.

    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)
    7/8
    Grantees still filing
    7/8
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and 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 grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

    25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's 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
    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.

    Otto Bremer TrustWisconsin Balance of …Green Bay Packers Fou…Baird Foundation IncDonor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
    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

    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 Wisconsin Association for Runaway Services Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Wisconsin Association for Runaway Services Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

    2024
    ’20’21’22’23’24
    no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's 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, FY20–24
      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 8 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12 to 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

      Play a game based on Wisconsin Association for Runaway Services’ 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