Skip to content
Berrien-Cass-Vanburen Workforce Development Board Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Berrien-Cass-Vanburen Workforce Development Board Inc

Provide sustainable and systemic solutions for the most pressing employer workforce challenges.

$1.3M
Granted FY2025still arriving
36
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$315k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Employment$5.2MHousing & Shelter$299kReligion$140kHuman Services$74kCommunity Improvement$56kYouth Development$55kPublic Safety & Disaster$10kOther$0
02FY2025 · 36 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 36 grants below total $1,177,303, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,325,217 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $147,914 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 $10k10 grants · $67k
  • $10k–50k20 grants · $481k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $315k
  • $250k+1 grant · $315k
$21,380
Median grant
5
States reached
$6.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
KALAMAZOO PROBATION ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM$314,768
NEW HEIGHTS CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION$78,751
TWIN COUNTY COMMUNITY PROBATION CENTER$76,980
MIDWEST STRATEGY GRO$56,874
CDW DIRECT LLC$51,216
BRAMMALL INDUSTRIAL$51,060
Individual grant recipient$44,799
MILLER JOHNSON SNELL & CUMMISKEY PLC$42,946
HPT INVESTMENT LLC$41,900
MINDSPRING LLC$38,255
YEO & YEO PC$33,440
COUNTRY MANAGEMENT PROPERTIES LLC$26,695
DOUBLEDAY OFFICE PRO$25,225
SECURE COUNSELING AND PC$24,040
BENTON HOTEL$22,919
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 (FY17–25, $285k) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ALLIAN: $137k → 21%HEARTLAND HUMAN CARE SERVICES: $60k → 14%NEW HEIGHTS CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION: $79k → 15%NEW HEIGHTS CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION: $9k → 15%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.

64%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.8M · 24 repeat orgs$2.1M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +31% since the first grant, against +20% for those funded once.

24 repeat relationships: 15 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 21 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

24
22

Total granted

$3.8M
$1.7M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+31%
+20%

Still filing today

25%
23%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 66% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $404k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesEmploymentCrime & LegalCommunity ImprovementEducationOther
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

  • WE
    W E UPJOHN UNEMPLOYMENT TRUSTEE CORPORATION
    2× · 2017–2018 · $463k · revenue +31%
  • NH
    NEW HEIGHTS CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPM
    2× · 2024–2025 · $88k · revenue +3%
  • CA
    CORNERSTONE ALLIANCE
    2× · 2019–2020 · $45k · revenue +36%

Funded once

  • DE
    DETROIT EMPLOYMENT SOLUTIONS CORPOR
    one grant, 2017 · $307k
  • WM
    WEST MICHIGAN WORKS
    one grant, 2017 · $244k
  • GM
    GST MICHIGAN WORKS
    one grant, 2017 · $234k
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
Michigan Chamber of Commerce

To promote conditions favorable to job creation and business success in michigan.

—
2
West Central Job Partnership Inc

Job training and workforce development

Employment
3
Michigan State Afl-Cio Workforce Development Institute

To apply the principles of workforce development to grow michigan's economy while improving the lives of michigan workers.

Employment
4
Tecumseh Area Partnership Inc

Employment and training services

Employment
5
Saginaw County Chamber of Commerce

To be a catalyst for economic and community progress within the great lakes bay region.

—
6
Crossroads Industries Inc

Provides work activity for the mentally and physically disabled.

Employment
7
Winona County Development Achievement Center Inc

Provide training and habilitation services for developmentally disabled adults.

Employment
8
Wisconsin Regional Training Partnership

To develop services and training programs for area employers to expand employment opportunities. wrtp is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit workforce intermediary dedicated to connecting people to family-sustaining jobs. our mission is to enhance the…

Philanthropy
9
Michigan Assoc of Community Mental Health Boards

Assisting the community mental health boards of michigan in developing methods for mental health planning, care and treatment.

—
10
Southwest Wisconsin Workforce Development Board Inc

Provide a collaborative talent development system within the region.

Public Benefit
11
Greater New Bedford Workforce Investment Board Inc

Meet the workforce needs of employers and support economic development in greater new bedford.

Community Improvement
12
Michiana Partnership Inc

The south bend - elkhart regional partnership focuses on a long-term systemic approach to advance the region's economy by aligning the efforts of various stakeholders around five key areas: educating a world-class workforce, recruiting and…

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Berrien-Cass-Vanburen Workforce Development Board Inc; the most unlike its peers is Southwestern Michigan College Foundation. 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

13 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. 13 of the 67 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/13
Grantees still filing
10/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LAKE MICHIGAN COLLEGE: $776,957 · OtherLAKE MICHIGAN COLLEGEMICHIGAN DEP OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES: $427,975 · OtherMICHIGAN DEP OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICESDETROIT EMPLOYMENT SOLUTIONS CORPOR: $306,865 · OtherDETROIT EMPLOYMENT SOLUTIONS CORPORWEST MICHIGAN WORKS: $243,585 · OtherWEST MICHIGAN WORKSGST MICHIGAN WORKS: $234,445 · OtherGST MICHIGAN WORKSNETWORKS NORTHWEST: $163,571 · OtherCREATIVE FINANCIAL STAFFING LLC: $163,295 · OtherFIRST CHURCH OF GOD OF ST JOSEPH MICHIGAN: $140,000 · Other+48 more: $1,585,033 · Other+48 moreKALAMAZOO PROBATION ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM: $772,693 · Crime & LegalKALAMAZOO PROBATIO…TWIN COUNTY COMM PROBATION CENTER: $168,500 · Crime & LegalTWIN COUNTY COMM P…W E UPJOHN UNEMPLOYMENT TRUSTEE CORPORATION: $462,601 · EmploymentW E UPJOH…Michigan Job Training Partnership Assoc: $39,334 · EmploymentMichigan …+1 more: $5,073 · EmploymentSOUTHEAST MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ALLIANCE: $136,579 · Human ServicesNEW HEIGHTS CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPM: $88,211 · Human ServicesHEARTLAND HUMAN CARE SERVICES INC: $60,000 · Human ServicesCORNERSTONE ALLIANCE: $45,150 · Community ImprovementMARKET VANBUREN: $28,300 · Community ImprovementSOUTHWESTERN MICHIGAN COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $22,199 · Education
Other$4,041,726Crime & Legal$941,193Employment$507,008Human Services$284,790Community Improvement$73,450Education$22,199

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 budgetKALAMAZOO PROBATION ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM: $772,693 over 2y, 4.2% of budgetW E UPJOHN UNEMPLOYMENT TRUSTEE CORPORATION: $462,601 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetTWIN COUNTY COMM PROBATION CENTER: $168,500 over 2y, 3.1% of budgetSOUTHEAST MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ALLIANCE: $136,579 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetNEW HEIGHTS CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPM: $88,211 over 2y, 8.5% of budgetHEARTLAND HUMAN CARE SERVICES INC: $60,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCORNERSTONE ALLIANCE: $45,150 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetMichigan Job Training Partnership Assoc: $39,334 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetMARKET VANBUREN: $28,300 over 1y, 6.7% of budgetBERRIEN-CASS-VANBUREN WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD INC: $23,176 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSOUTHWESTERN MICHIGAN COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $22,199 over 1y, 2.4% 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.

  • Who funds KALAMAZOO PROBATION ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM ↗
  • Who funds W E UPJOHN UNEMPLOYMENT TRUSTEE CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds TWIN COUNTY COMM PROBATION CENTER ↗
  • Who funds SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds NEW HEIGHTS CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPM ↗
  • Who funds HEARTLAND HUMAN CARE SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds CORNERSTONE ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds Michigan Job Training Partnership Assoc ↗
  • Who funds MARKET VANBUREN ↗

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile Foundation
Amazonsmile FoundationWA0.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Berrien-Cass-Vanburen Workforce Development Board Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Berrien-Cass-Vanburen Workforce Development Board Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%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
    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 67 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 Berrien-Cass-Vanburen Workforce Development Board’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