Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Wisconsin Council-Society for Human Resource Management

The society's mission is to be the recognized state leader in human resource management by bringing the society closer to home and enhancing the value of shrm membership.

$90k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$11k
Largest
01What you fund
01

What you funded, over time

By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 58% of WISCONSIN COUNCIL-SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.

02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 8 grants below total $67,179 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $90,283 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $23,104 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $35k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $33k
$7,508
Median grant
2
States reached
$390k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GREATER MADISON AREA SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INC$11,021
METRO MILWAUKEE SHRM INC$10,843
SHRM FOUNDATION INC$10,738
CHIPPEWA VALLEY SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT$7,508
BLACKHAWK HUMAN RESOURCE ASSOCIATION$7,392
SHEBOYGAN AREA CHAPTER SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT$7,347
ENVISION GREATER FOND DU LAC INC$6,692
GREEN BAY AREA CHAPTER SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT$5,638
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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 78% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%METRO MILWAUKEE SHRM INC: $27k → 6%FOX VALLEY SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: $16k → 7%JEFFERSON COUNTY HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION: $6k → 8%SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT - DODGE COUNTY: $6k → 9%FOND DU LAC AREA HUMAN RESOURCE ASSOCIATION: $16k → 9%GREEN BAY AREA CHAPTER SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: $45k → 10%GREATER MADISON AREA SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INC: $37k → 10%SHRM FOUNDATION INC: $13k → 9%METRO MILWAUKEE SHRM INC: $27k → 6%FOX VALLEY SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: $16k → 7%ENVISION GREATER FOND DU LAC INC: $7k → 9%GREEN BAY AREA CHAPTER SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: $20k → 10%GREATER MADISON AREA SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INC: $26k → 10%SHRM FOUNDATION INC: $12k → 9%METRO MILWAUKEE SHRM INC: $22k → 6%FOX VALLEY SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: $13k → 7%ENVISION GREATER FOND DU LAC INC: $6k → 9%GREEN BAY AREA CHAPTER SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: $20k → 10%GREATER MADISON AREA SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INC: $24k → 10%SHRM FOUNDATION INC: $12k → 9%METRO MILWAUKEE SHRM INC: $16k → 6%FOX VALLEY SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: $11k → 7%FOND DU LAC AREA ASSOCIATION OF COMMERCE: $6k → 9%GREEN BAY AREA CHAPTER SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: $19k → 10%GREATER MADISON AREA SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INC: $13k → 10%SHRM FOUNDATION INC: $11k → 9%METRO MILWAUKEE SHRM INC: $15k → 6%FOND DU LAC AREA HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: $5k → 9%GREEN BAY AREA CHAPTER SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: $15k → 10%GREATER MADISON AREA SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INC: $33k → 10%METRO MILWAUKEE SHRM INC: $12k → 6%GREEN BAY AREA CHAPTER SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: $12k → 10%GREATER MADISON AREA SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INC: $24k → 10%METRO MILWAUKEE SHRM INC: $11k → 6%GREEN BAY AREA CHAPTER SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: $12k → 10%GREATER MADISON AREA SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INC: $22k → 10%METRO MILWAUKEE SHRM INC: $10k → 6%GREEN BAY AREA CHAPTER SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: $9k → 10%GREATER MADISON AREA SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INC: $20k → 10%METRO MILWAUKEE SHRM INC: $5k → 6%GREEN BAY AREA CHAPTER SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: $6k → 10%GREATER MADISON AREA SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INC: $11k → 10%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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$840k · 12 repeat orgs$11k to everyone else

12 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
2

Total granted

$840k
$11k

Still filing today

58%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
Community ImprovementPhilanthropyOther

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

  • GM
    GREATER MADISON AREA SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $209k · revenue +16%
  • SF
    SHRM FOUNDATION INC
    4× · 2022–2025 · $48k · revenue +22%
  • DL
    DESTINATION LAKE WINNEBAGO REGION INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $27k · revenue +31%

Funded once

  • SF
    SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT-DODGE COUNTY
    one grant, 2024 · $6k
  • SA
    SHRM-RACINE AND KENOSHA AREA
    one grant, 2018 · $6k

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
Greater Miami Society for Human Resource Management

Establish and maintain standards of excellence for the human resource practitioner through a variety of services relating to human resource concerns

2
Washington State Shrm

To support shrm members in the state of washington with activities and communications which enhance, support chapter leadership, and address state-wide issues in human resource management.

Community Improvement
3
Society for Human Resource Mgt Philadelphia Region Chapter

To keep the organization members and associates informed to keep professional developments and enhance visibility of the human resources professional within the business community.

4
The Illinois State Council of Shrm

Ilshrm supports shrm chapters across illinois, representing them to national shrm and helping each reach its potential. a statewide volunteer board advances hr by promoting professionalism, enhancing member value, and coordinating…

Community Improvement
5
Oregon Shrm

The purpose of the oregon shrm (affiliate of the society for human resource management)is to promote the educational and professional development of our members and to promote other non-profit purposes of the society of human resource…

Community Improvement
6
Society for Human Resource Management Shrm-Atlanta Inc

To develop the human resource professional and the awareness of human resource management best practices in the business community via chapter initiatives on:Developing high-performing HR professionals,Encouraging corporate cultures that…

7
Society for Human Resource Management

Shrm empowers people and workplaces by advancing hr practices and by maximizing human potential.

Community Improvement
8
National Human Resources Association Orange County Affiliate

To provide an active forum within a supportive environment for strengthening the role of human resource professionals as strategic business leaders and partners.

Community Improvement
9
Michigan Council of the Society for Human Resource Management

To provide opportunities for local & regional shrm chapters to network, share best practices, & provide development opportunities to their attendees acting as a conduit to the society for human resource management (national shrm) which…

Community Improvement
10
Greater Chicago Club Managers Association

The association is a professional association which functions as a chapter of the club managers association of america. the purpose of this association is to promote and advance friendly relationships between and among persons connected…

11
Society of Human Resource Professionals

Educate human resource professionals.

Community Improvement
12
Southwest Washington Shrm

To be the premier resource for leadership and development for human resource professionals and organizations within southwest washington. to provide a forum for the personal and professional development of members. to provide an…

Community Improvement

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Metro Milwaukee Shrm Inc and the most unlike its peers is Destination Lake Winnebago Region 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 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 14 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
3/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

GREATER MADISON AREA SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INC — $209,313 · OtherGREATER MADISON AREA SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INCMETRO MILWAUKEE SHRM INC — $145,166 · OtherMETRO MILWAUKEE SHRM INCSHEBOYGAN AREA CHAPTER - SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT — $32,512 · OtherSHEBOYGAN AREA CHAPTER - SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENTDESTINATION LAKE WINNEBAGO REGION INC — $27,185 · OtherDESTINATION LAKE WINNEBAGO REGION INCLA CROSSE AREA SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT — $20,703 · OtherJEFFERSON COUNTY HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION — $17,450 · Other+4 more — $37,565 · Other+4 moreGREEN BAY AREA CHAPTER OF THE SOCIETY OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT — $158,289 · Community ImprovementGREEN BAY AREA CHAPTER OF THE SOCIETY OF …FOX VALLEY SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INC — $87,940 · Community ImprovementFOX VALLEY SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MAN…BLACKHAWK HUMAN RESOURCES ASSOCIATION — $67,627 · Community ImprovementBLACKHAWK HUMAN RESOURCES ASSOCIATIONSHRM FOUNDATION INC — $47,771 · Philanthropy
Other$489,894Community Improvement$313,856Philanthropy$47,771

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 budgetGREATER MADISON AREA SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INC — $209,313 over 9y, 22% of budgetGREEN BAY AREA CHAPTER OF THE SOCIETY OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT — $158,289 over 9y, 58% of budgetMETRO MILWAUKEE SHRM INC — $145,166 over 9y, 34% of budgetFOX VALLEY SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INC — $87,940 over 7y, 23% of budgetSHRM FOUNDATION INC — $47,771 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetDESTINATION LAKE WINNEBAGO REGION INC — $27,185 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetENVISION GREATER FOND DU LAC INC — $12,886 over 2y, 0.4% 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.

  • Who funds GREATER MADISON AREA SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INC
  • Who funds GREEN BAY AREA CHAPTER OF THE SOCIETY OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
  • Who funds METRO MILWAUKEE SHRM INC
  • Who funds FOX VALLEY SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INC
  • Who funds BLACKHAWK HUMAN RESOURCES ASSOCIATION
  • Who funds SHRM FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds DESTINATION LAKE WINNEBAGO REGION INC
  • Who funds ENVISION GREATER FOND DU LAC INC

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization Wisconsin Council-Society for Human Resource Management 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
202122232425
no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%your share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%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 · 0–15%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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 14 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph