Skip to content
Ann Arbor Rotary Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Ann Arbor Rotary Foundation

To receive and administer funds exclusively to 501(c)(3) organizations for educational and charitable purposes.

$157k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$25k
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, FY2017 to 2025.

Public Benefit$575kHuman Services$39kEducation$38kFood & Nutrition$27kInternational$20kHousing & Shelter$19kYouth Development$13kRecreation & Sports$8kOther$0
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $30,600, the rows itemized in this filing. The $157,098 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $126,498 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.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $6k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
$25,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$3.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CITY OF ANN ARBOR$25,000
FOOD GATHERERS$5,600
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 (FY20–22, $27k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 18%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 18%OZONE HOUSE: $6k → 14%CHILDREN'S LITERACY NETWORK: $10k → 14%PEACE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER: $6k → 14%CHILDREN'S LITERACY NETWORK: $6k → 14%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.

Grants abroad, by region: $26k on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 3 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Niger$11k · 42% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: CLINIC

Honduras$8k · 29% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: INTERNATIONAL SEVICE

Uganda$8k · 29% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: GENERATOR

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

85%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$631k · 4 repeat orgs$112k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +72% since the first grant, against +70% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
15

Total granted

$631k
$112k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+72%
+70%

Still filing today

75%
60%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’19’20’21’22’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’19’20’21’22’25
Human ServicesHousing & ShelterInternationalCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • CO
    CITY OF ANN ARBOR
    2× · 2017–2025 · $575k
  • FG
    FOOD GATHERERS
    4× · 2017–2025 · $27k · revenue +73%
  • CL
    CHILDRENS LITERACY NETWORK
    2× · 2020–2022 · $16k · revenue +72%

Funded once

  • RF
    ROTARY FDTN OF ROTARY INT'L
    one grant, 2017 · $15k
  • MF
    MICHIGAN FOSTER CARE CLOSETgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $13k · revenue +143%
  • DR
    Detroit Rotary Foundation
    one grant, 2022 · $13k · revenue -4%
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
Homeless Action Network of Detroit

Our mission is to increase awareness of the problems of people who are homeless and the development and carrying out of strategies to create permanent solutions to homelessness in our community.

Human Services
2
Severe Weather Network Livingston County

The Severe Weather Network (SWN) partners with community organizations, agencies, and faith communities to provide emergency, overnight refuge during the winter months for people experiencing homelessness in Livingston County. SWN also…

—
3
Michigan Center of Accountability for Republicans

Social welfare and issue advocacy

Civil Rights
4
Greater Detroit Community Outreach Center inc

Greater Detroit Community Outreach Center is a community based nonprofit organization designed to help prevent teen parenthood among school age youth. The center has a staff of outreach representatives who go into the homes with children…

Human Services
5
Health Net of West Michigan

To improve the health of children and adults, particularly vulnerable populations, through education and connections to health care and support services.

Health
6
Fostering Solutions

The purpose of the organization is to provide child welfare and supporting services to children, families, and individuals working and living in michigan.

Human Services
7
Michigan Casa Inc

Michigan casa, inc. is dedicated to changing the lives of abused and neglected children by advocating for their best interests through establishing, supporting, and expanding quality casa programs throughout the state of michigan to ensure…

Civil Rights
8
Child & Family Services of Northwestern Michigan Inc

We strive to ensure the safety and well-being of children, youth, adults, and families in times of crisis, challenge, and life transition.

—
9
Hands Across the Water Inc

Hands across the water supports and empowers children and families through inclusive, strengths-based services. we envision a community where every child is valued and has a safe home and loving family where they can thrive. in keeping…

Human Services
10
Family Network

Family network desires to serve the greater wyoming, mi area by providing food, resources and services to people in need.

Food & Nutrition
11
Ann Arbor Community Center Inc

With an emphasis on socio-economically disadvantaged youth and families, the Ann Arbor Community Center, Inc. (AACC) is a vital community resource that provides high quality programs, information and services to citizens in need.

—
12
Lighthouse Immigrant Advocates

Bringing stability to west michigan families and communities through legal services and advocacy.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Washtenaw Area Council for Children; the most unlike its peers is Michigan Foster Care Closet. 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

12 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. 12 of the 19 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
10/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CITY OF ANN ARBOR: $575,000 · OtherCITY OF ANN ARBORFOOD GATHERERS: $27,300 · Other+8 more: $57,400 · Other+8 moreCHILDRENS LITERACY NETWORK: $15,600 · Human ServicesMICHIGAN FOSTER CARE CLOSET: $12,500 · Human ServicesCOMMUNITY ACTION NETWORK: $5,600 · Human ServicesOZONE HOUSE INC: $5,600 · Human ServicesPeace Neighborhood Center: $5,600 · Human ServicesHAITI NURSING FOUNDATION INC: $13,500 · InternationalSHELTER ASSOCIATION OF WASHTENAW COUNTY: $7,500 · Housing & ShelterHABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $5,600 · Housing & ShelterDetroit Rotary Foundation: $12,500 · Community Improvement
Other$659,700Human Services$44,900International$13,500Housing & Shelter$13,100Community Improvement$12,500

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 budgetFOOD GATHERERS: $27,300 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetCHILDRENS LITERACY NETWORK: $15,600 over 2y, 5.3% of budgetHAITI NURSING FOUNDATION INC: $13,500 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetMICHIGAN FOSTER CARE CLOSET: $12,500 over 1y, 13% of budgetDetroit Rotary Foundation: $12,500 over 1y, 12% of budgetSHELTER ASSOCIATION OF WASHTENAW COUNTY: $7,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCOMMUNITY ACTION NETWORK: $5,600 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetWASHTENAW AREA COUNCIL FOR CHILDREN: $5,600 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetOZONE HOUSE INC: $5,600 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $5,600 over 1y, 1.8% of budget826 MICHIGAN INC: $5,600 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetPeace Neighborhood Center: $5,600 over 1y, 0.4% 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.

Ann Arbor Area Commun…James a and Faith Kni…Harry a and Margaret …Kiwanis Club of Ann A…United Way of Washten…Edward F Redies Found…Jenkins FoundationThrift Shop Associati…The Buhr FoundationSpeckhard-Knight Char…The Martin Family Fou…United Way for Southe…
Ann Arbor Area Community FoundationMI26.1× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation · James a and Faith Knight Foundation · Harry a and Margaret D Towsley Foundation · Kiwanis Club of Ann Arbor Foundation Inc · United Way of Washtenaw County · Edward F Redies Foundation Inc · Jenkins Foundation · Thrift Shop Association of Ann Arbor · The Buhr Foundation · Speckhard-Knight Charitable Foundation · The Martin Family Foundation · United Way for Southeastern Michigan

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 Ann Arbor Rotary Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ann Arbor Rotary Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%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 · 0–30%
    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 19 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Ann Arbor Rotary’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