Skip to content

· 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 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 2024.

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

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

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

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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 53% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its 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
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.

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

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +233% since the first grant, against -55% for those 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
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

  • 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
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
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wisconsin Infrastructure Investment Now Inc; 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 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. 8 of the 13 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

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

Where the money sits, by cause and 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 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 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
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.

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

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 Homeowners Alliance Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Wisconsin Homeowners Alliance Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%funder's 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, FY20–25
    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 13 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Wisconsin Homeowners Alliance’s filings →

    More from the funding graph