Skip to content
482 Forward at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· 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.

$124k
Granted FY2024still arriving
9
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$23k
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, FY2023 to 2024.

Education$106kCommunity Improvement$93kYouth Development$60kHuman Services$40kPublic Benefit$25k
02FY2024 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $104,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $124,000 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $20,000 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$3.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
STUDENT ADVOCACY CENTER OF$23,000
CENTER FOR AFROCENTRIC THOUGHT$11,000
MACOMB INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL DISTRICT$10,000
DETROIT HISPANIC DEVELOPMENT$10,000
EASTSIDE COMMUNITY NETWORK$10,000
CONGRESS OF COMMUNITIES$10,000
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD INITIATIVES$10,000
DETROIT HEALS DETROIT$10,000
DEVELOPING KIDS$10,000
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:

Its 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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%SOUTHWESTERN MICHIGAN: $13k → 14%URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD INITIATIVES: $30k → 21%URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD INITIATIVES: $10k → 21%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.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$246k · 8 repeat orgs$78k to everyone else

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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
4

Total granted

$246k
$68k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-13%
+49%

Still filing today

75%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.

50%100%’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’23’24
Community ImprovementHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentEducationOther
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

  • STUDENT ADVOCACY CENTER OF MICHIGAN INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $58k · revenue -16%
  • Urban Neighborhood Initiatives Inc
    2× · 2023–2024 · $40k · revenue -22%
  • KK
    KDK KIDS DEVELOPING KIDS YOUTH MENTORING PROGRAM
    2× · 2023–2024 · $30k

Funded once

  • OF
    OAKLAND FORWARD
    one grant, 2023 · $25k
  • WT
    We the People MIgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $20k · revenue +49%
  • SM
    Southwestern Michigan Urban League
    one grant, 2023 · $13k · revenue -40%
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
Dream of Detroit

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.

Human Services
2
We the People 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.

Human Services
3
Urban League of Detroit and Southeastern Michigan

To enable african americans and people in need to reach their full human potential

—
4
Community Education Commission

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.

Education
5
Detroiters Working for Environmental Justice

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.

Health
6
The Youth Connection Inc

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.

Youth Development
7
United Community Housing Coalition

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…

Housing & Shelter
8
Chicago United for Equity

Connecting and amplifying the power of individuals to build a just, equitable, and inclusive city.

Civil Rights
9
New Hope Community Development

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.

Housing & Shelter
10
The Detroit Equity Report Inc

To promote equality and inclusion in society.

Employment
11
Northend Christian Community Development Corporation

North End CDC services the historic North End community of Detroit MI . The program specializes in providing workforce and youth development.

Community Improvement
12
Detroit Cultivator Community Land Trust

The maintenance and beautification of vacant land inside of a community

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Detroit Hispanic Development Corporation; the most unlike its peers is Detroit Heals Detroit 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
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

STUDENT ADVOCACY CENTER OF MICHIGAN INC: $58,000 · OtherSTUDENT ADVOCACY CENTER OF MICHIGAN INCKDK KIDS DEVELOPING KIDS YOUTH MENTORING PROGRAM: $30,000 · OtherKDK KIDS DEVELOPING KIDS YOUTH MENTORING PROGRAMOAKLAND FORWARD: $25,000 · OtherOAKLAND FORWARDCENTER FOR AFROCENTRIC THOUGHT: $18,000 · OtherCENTER FOR AFROCENTRIC THOUGHTCOMMUNITY CONVERSATION AND COLLABORATION INC: $10,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY CONVERSATION AND COLLABORATION INCMACOMB INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL DISTRICT: $10,000 · OtherMACOMB INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL DISTRICTDETROIT HISPANIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $30,000 · Community ImprovementDETROIT HISPANIC DEVELOP…CONGRESS OF COMMUNITIES: $20,000 · Community ImprovementCONGRESS OF COMMUNITIESWARRENCONNER DEVELOPMENT COALITION: $20,000 · Community ImprovementWARRENCONNER DEVELOPMENT…Urban Neighborhood Initiatives Inc: $40,000 · Human ServicesUrban Neighborhood…Southwestern Michigan Urban League: $12,500 · Human ServicesSouthwestern Michi…Detroit Heals Detroit Inc: $30,000 · Youth DevelopmentDetroit He…We the People MI: $20,000 · Education
Other$151,000Community Improvement$70,000Human Services$52,500Youth Development$30,000Education$20,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSTUDENT ADVOCACY CENTER OF MICHIGAN INC: $58,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetUrban Neighborhood Initiatives Inc: $40,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetDETROIT HISPANIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $30,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetDetroit Heals Detroit Inc: $30,000 over 2y, 3.9% of budgetCONGRESS OF COMMUNITIES: $20,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetWARRENCONNER DEVELOPMENT COALITION: $20,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetWe the People MI: $20,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetSouthwestern Michigan Urban League: $12,500 over 1y, 1.9% 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.

The Skillman Foundati…United Way for Southe…Community Foundation …WK Kellogg FoundationDTE Energy FoundationThe Kresge FoundationThe Ford FoundationTides FoundationEnterprise Community …Local Initiatives Sup…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …
The Skillman FoundationMI21.9× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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 482 Forward funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from 482 Forward. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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 482 Forward’s 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