· Public charity
482 Forward
We are creating a detroit where every student graduates ready to become a fully engaged participant in the world, equipped with the character and the capacity to negotiate his/her environment and change it for the better.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2023–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 9 grants below total $104,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $124,000 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $20,000 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.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| STUDENT ADVOCACY CENTER OF | $23,000 |
| CENTER FOR AFROCENTRIC THOUGHT | $11,000 |
| EASTSIDE COMMUNITY NETWORK | $10,000 |
| CONGRESS OF COMMUNITIES | $10,000 |
| URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD INITIATIVES | $10,000 |
| MACOMB INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL DISTRICT | $10,000 |
| DETROIT HISPANIC DEVELOPMENT | $10,000 |
| DETROIT HEALS DETROIT | $10,000 |
| DEVELOPING KIDS | $10,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY23–24, $53k) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
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.
8 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
STUDENT ADVOCACY CENTER OF MICHIGAN INC2× · 2023–2024 · $58k · revenue -16%
Urban Neighborhood Initiatives Inc2× · 2023–2024 · $40k · revenue -22%
DETROIT HISPANIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION2× · 2023–2024 · $30k · revenue +29%
Funded once
- OFOAKLAND FORWARDone grant, 2023 · $25k
- WTWe the People MIgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $20k · revenue +49%
- SMSouthwestern Michigan Urban Leagueone grant, 2023 · $13k · revenue -40%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
Dream of Detroit is combining community organizing with strategic housing and land development to build a healthy community and empower a marginalized neighborhood on the Westside of Detroit.
Dedicated to community coalition building and providing vehicles that inform, train, and mobilize the citizens of the city of Detroit and beyond to improve their quality of life.
A neighborhood based housing and development Corporation with the purpose of revializing the detroit area, by providubg affordable housing to persons of low and moderate incomes and providing youth development and networking.
The maintenance and beautification of vacant land inside of a community
CEC works with diverse stakeholders across Detroit to develop critical resources and system-level solutions that address common challenges faced by Detroit families in accessing quality education.
The organization is known as the leader in the movement and is seen as the "go to" experts on environmental justice and sustainable redevelopment because of its knowledge and its network.
To enable african americans and people in need to reach their full human potential
North End CDC services the historic North End community of Detroit MI . The program specializes in providing workforce and youth development.
The Youth Connection is committed to connecting all youth and their families in metro Detroit to a brighter future by providing quality programs and supportive services.
To promote equality and inclusion in society.
To help low-income residents in detroit and wayne county stay in their homes and strengthen their communities, through representation, support, and ownership. we believe that having a place to live is a basic human right, and are…
Urban Community Network UCN is a non-profit organization that promotes safe, healthy sustainable communities where youth and their families can thrive.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Detroit Hispanic Development Corporation and the most unlike its peers is Congress of Communities. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
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 2017–2025, 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; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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 STUDENT ADVOCACY CENTER OF MICHIGAN INC ↗
- Who funds Urban Neighborhood Initiatives Inc ↗
- Who funds DETROIT HISPANIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds Detroit Heals Detroit Inc ↗
- Who funds WARRENCONNER DEVELOPMENT COALITION ↗
- Who funds We the People MI ↗
- Who funds CONGRESS OF COMMUNITIES ↗
- Who funds Southwestern Michigan Urban League ↗
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.
Open a dossier: The Skillman Foundation · United Way for Southeastern Michigan · Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan · WK Kellogg Foundation · Dte Energy Foundation · The Kresge Foundation · The Ford Foundation · Tides Foundation · Enterprise Community Partners Inc · Local Initiatives Support Corporation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 482 Forward 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.
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.