Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Wisconsin Homeowners Alliance Inc

To advance and promote issues of concern to wisconsin property owners.

$1.1M
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$1.0M
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 FY20172024.

Public Benefit$5.5MCivil Rights$277kCommunity Improvement$207kCrime & Legal$35k
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $70k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
  • $250k+1 grant · $1.0M
$50,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$4.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WISCONSIN PRINCIPLES INC$1,000,000
WISCONSIN INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT NOW INC$50,000
MIDWEST GROWTH INC$35,000
WISCONSIN INSTITUTE FOR LAW AND LIBERTY INC$35,000
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 53% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 10%WISCONSIN PRINCIPLES INC: $1.0M → 5%A BETTER SOUTHEAST WISCONSIN INC: $50k → 10%WISCONSIN INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT NOW INC: $50k → 10%WISCONSIN INSTITUTE FOR LAW AND LIBERTY INC: $35k → 17%WISCONSIN ALLIANCE FOR REFORM INC: $600k → 10%A BETTER DANE COUNTY INC: $12k → 10%EMPOWER WISCONSIN INC: $250k → 10%WISCONSINEYE PUBLIC AFFAIRS NETWORK INC: $25k → 10%Republican Party of Wisconsin - segregated fund: $18k → 10%Republican Assembly Campaign Committee - segregated fund: $12k → 10%DRIVE INC: $10k → 10%DRIVE INC: $10k → 10%EMPOWER WISCONSIN INC: $7k → 10%COMMITTEE TO ELECT A REPUBLICAN SENATE - SEGREGATED FUND: $6k → 10%A BETTER DANE COUNTY INC: $35k → 10%A BETTER DANE COUNTY INC: $25k → 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.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$4.8M · 4 repeat orgs$1.2M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +233% since the first grant, against -55% for the ones you funded once.

4 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
5

Total granted

$4.8M
$111k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+233%
-55%

Still filing today

50%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.1M went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Community ImprovementCivil RightsCrime & LegalArts & CultureOther

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

  • WA
    Wisconsin Alliance for Reform Inc
    6× · 2017–2023 · $4.4M · revenue +233% · 55% of their budget
  • EW
    Empower Wisconsin Inc
    2× · 2020–2021 · $257k · revenue -80% · 57% of their budget
  • AB
    A BETTER DANE COUNTY INC
    3× · 2017–2020 · $72k

Funded once

  • AB
    A BETTER SOUTHEAST WISCONSIN INC
    one grant, 2020 · $50k · revenue -70% · 82% of their budget
  • WP
    WISCONSINEYE PUBLIC AFFAIRS NETWORK INC
    one grant, 2018 · $25k · revenue -55%
  • RP
    Republican Party of Wisconsin - segregated fund
    one grant, 2017 · $18k

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
Empower Wisconsin Foundation Inc

Empower Wisconsin Foundation's mission is to educate both the public and leaders of grassroots initiatives on criminal justice reform, educational choice, limited government, freedom of speech, transparency in government and private…

2
Our Wisconsin Revolution Inc

To promote the common good and general welfare of the people of wisconsin.

Civil Rights
3
Wisconsin Progress Inc

Wisconsin progress recruits, trains, elects, and develops progressive candidates and leaders at the local and state legislative levels.

Civil Rights
4
Wisconsin Progress Institute Inc

Wisconsin progress institute exists to empower wisconsin's locally elected leaders with the tools, training, and support they need to be effective, values-driven public servants.

Education
5
Working for Wisconsin Inc

To promote social welfare including but not limited to informing the public and policymakers on the importance of wisconsin's construction work to the state's economy, the vitality of its communities, and the lives of its citizens.

Employment
6
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
7
Fix the System-Wisconsin Action Inc

Promote & support nonpartisan political innovation in wisconsin by engaging in legislative and outreach activity to implement a strategy of innovations and reforms to open up competition in the politics industry.

Membership Benefit
8
350 Wisconsin Action Inc

350 Wisconsin Action mobilizes concerned climate voters to push for bold climate action from government and elected officials. We keep the climate crisis at the center of the political conversation, and push for progressive policies that…

Environment
9
Wisconsin World Affairs Council Inc
10
Forever Wisconsin Inc

To promote social welfare through education and outreach about the benefits of maintaining and improving Wisconsinites quality of life, including by providing for a better environment, stronger education system, safer communities, fair…

Civil Rights
11
Wisconsin Environmental Initiative Inc

WEI works to improve the environment, economy, and quality of Wisconsin through initiatives that promote responsible businesses, sound environmental policy, green building, and water stewardship.

Unclassified
12
Together Wisconsin Acts Inc

Together wisconsin acts, inc. (twa) advocates for legislation, regulations and government programs to maintain and improve the common good, quality of life, and social welfare of the people in the state of wisconsin. twa activities include…

Health

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wisconsin Infrastructure Investment Now Inc and the most unlike its peers is A Better Southeast Wisconsin 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 13 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
3/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Wisconsin Alliance for Reform Inc — $4,418,500 · OtherWisconsin Alliance for Reform IncEmpower Wisconsin Inc — $257,000 · Other+6 more — $178,325 · OtherWISCONSIN PRINCIPLES INC — $1,000,000 · Civil RightsWISCONSIN PRINCIPL…WISCONSIN INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT NOW INC — $50,000 · Community ImprovementMIDWEST GROWTH INC — $35,000 · Community ImprovementWISCONSIN INSTITUTE FOR LAW & LIBERTY — $35,000 · Crime & LegalWISCONSINEYE PUBLIC AFFAIRS NETWORK INC — $25,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$4,853,825Civil Rights$1,000,000Community Improvement$85,000Crime & Legal$35,000Arts & Culture$25,000

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 budgetWisconsin Alliance for Reform Inc — $4,418,500 over 6y, 55% of budgetWISCONSIN PRINCIPLES INC — $1,000,000 over 1y, 36% of budgetEmpower Wisconsin Inc — $257,000 over 2y, 57% of budgetA BETTER SOUTHEAST WISCONSIN INC — $50,000 over 1y, 82% of budgetWISCONSIN INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT NOW INC — $50,000 over 1y, 7.3% of budgetWISCONSIN INSTITUTE FOR LAW & LIBERTY — $35,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetMIDWEST GROWTH INC — $35,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetWISCONSINEYE PUBLIC AFFAIRS NETWORK INC — $25,000 over 1y, 1.3% 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.

Wisconsin Bankers AssociationWI17.9× affinity6 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Wisconsin Bankers Association · Wmc Issues Mobilization Council 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 organization Wisconsin Homeowners Alliance 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.

2023
202122232425
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 13 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph