Loading…
· Private foundation
BARTSCH MEMORIAL TRUST XXXXX9004
This foundation accepts unsolicited grant applications.
$395k
Granted FY2024
10
Grants
3
Communities
$100k
Largest
01What you fund
01
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 68% of BARTSCH MEMORIAL TRUST XXXXX9004’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.
03FY2024 · 10 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k8 grants · $245k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $150k
$30,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$10M
Total assets
Largest grants
- CLARKSTON UNITED METHODIST CHURCH$100,364
- OPTIMIST CLUB FOUNDATION$50,000
- WARRIORS IN KAYAKS FOUNDATION$45,000
- WARRIORS AT SAIL FOUNDATION$45,000
- FRIENDS OF THE INDEPENDENCE TOWNSHIP$30,000
- CASA-THE VOICE FOR CLINTON COUNTYS$25,000
- DEWITT DISTRICT LIBRARY$25,000
- CLARKSTON BASKETBALL FOUNDATION$25,000
- POTTER PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY$25,000
- R J SCHEFFEL MEMORIAL TOY PROJECT INC$25,000
02The need
04
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:
Your human-services grants (FY18–19, $50k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16% — the area typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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 line in 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, United Way ALICE — 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.
91%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$2.7M · 13 repeat orgs$252k to everyone else
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +41% since the first grant, against -2% for the ones you funded once.
13 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
13
3
Total granted
$2.7M
$97k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+41%
-2%
Still filing today
38%
67%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 61% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $155k went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
Human ServicesCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitEducationPhilanthropyAnimalsOther
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
- OCOPTIMIST CLUB FOUNDATION7× · 2018–2024 · $457k · revenue +41% · 83% of their budget
- PPPOTTER PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY6× · 2019–2024 · $150k · revenue +61%
CENTER FOR MICHIGAN4× · 2018–2021 · $100k · revenue +254%
Funded once
- COCITY OF BRIDGMANone grant, 2018 · $61k
- OBOWOSSO BAND BOOSTERSone grant, 2018 · $25k · revenue -2% · 32% of their budget
- LOLIGHTHOUSE OF OAKLAND COUNTY INCone grant, 2018 · $11k · revenue -96%
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
Michigan Club Squash
Recreation & Sports
2
Clarkston Development Foundation
Clarkston Development Foundation, Inc., CDF Action, a not-for-profit created in 2010, uses an asset based community development approach, connecting and engaging the Clarkston community and surrounding areas by working alongside residents…
Human Services
3
Evans Scholars Foundation - Michigan
Educational.
Education
4
The Michigan Glass Project
Public Benefit
5
Mid-Michigan Children's Museum
To provide a hands-on environment that engages children to use their curiosity and creativity while learning about the wonders of our world.
Arts & Culture
6
Kiwanis of Michigan Foundation
—
7
Osseo-Maple Grove Hockey Association
Youth hockey program
Arts & Culture
8
Plymouth Canton Little League
Youth baseball and softball recreational league
—
9
Clayton County Public Schools Foundation
The clayton county public schools foundation is a philanthropic organization fostering the sustainable growth, development, and academic achievement of every student in clayton county.
Education
10
Eastern Michigan University Foundation
Eastern michigan university foundation's primary purpose is to solicit private funds on behalf of and for the exclusive benefit of eastern michigan university, and to expand its resource base through the management of assets and the…
Education
11
Clark County Public Education
The public education foundation works to create transformational change in teaching, learning, and education leadership.
Unclassified
12
Clarkston Education Foundation
The purpose of the Clarkston Education Foundation is to enhance education in Clarkston Schools.
Education
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Lighthouse of Oakland County and the most unlike its peers is Clarkston Basketball Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network
8 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
3/8
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Other$2,010,932Community Improvement$456,500Philanthropy$150,000Animals$150,000Public Benefit$100,000Human Services$61,006Education$25,000
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 OPTIMIST CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds R J SCHEFFEL MEMORIAL TOY PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds POTTER PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds EDUCATIONAL CHILD CARE CENTER ↗
- Who funds CLARKSTON BASKETBALL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds OWOSSO BAND BOOSTERS ↗
- Who funds LIGHTHOUSE OF OAKLAND COUNTY INC ↗
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.
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA3.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
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 organisation BARTSCH MEMORIAL TRUST XXXXX9004 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.
2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
typical government reliance, FY20–25
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. 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.
05Through Plinth
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: OPTIMIST CLUB FOUNDATION.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
insufficient risk
Limited financial data in public filings.
Track record & reputation
low risk
7 years of Form 990 filings, still active.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 383373756 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on OPTIMIST CLUB FOUNDATION, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
- WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 83% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to Bartsch Memorial Trust Xxxxx9004?
Find your warmest path to Bartsch Memorial Trust Xxxxx9004 through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines