Skip to content
Blue Water Community Action at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Blue Water Community Action

To plan, establish, coordinate, operate programs and conduct activities which give promise of progress toward eliminating and attacking the cause of poverty in st.

$1.7M
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$196k
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, FY2018 to 2025.

Environment$928kHuman Services$848kHousing & Shelter$431kHealth$170kCommunity Improvement$125kFood & Nutrition$24k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 7 grants below total $486,495, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,737,029 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $1,250,534 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 · $5k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $80k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $401k
$37,896
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BHK COMMUNITY ACTION$195,670
OTTAWA COMMUNITY ACTION$128,836
COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY OF SOUTH CENTRAL MICHIGAN$76,620
THE HARBOR$37,896
DETROIT RESCUE MISSION$27,498
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION$14,875
CHIPPEWA-LUCE-MACKINAW COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY$5,100
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 (FY18–25, $1.6M) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 69% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%THE HARBOR: $95k → 10%HUMAN DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION: $18k → 12%COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY OF SOUTH CENTRAL MICHIGAN: $77k → 14%GOGEBIC ONTONAGON COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY: $16k → 14%BHK COMMUNITY ACTION: $196k → 14%THE HARBOR: $73k → 10%HUMAN DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION: $17k → 12%COMMUNITY ACTION OF SOUTH CENTRAL MICHIGAN: $57k → 14%BHK COMMUNITY ACTION: $195k → 14%THE HARBOR: $73k → 10%HUMAN DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION: $15k → 12%COMMUNITY ACTION OF SOUTH CENTRAL MICHIGAN: $52k → 14%BHK COMMUNITY ACTION: $132k → 14%THE HARBOR: $71k → 10%HUMAN DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION: $9k → 12%COMMUNITY ACTION OF SOUTH CENTRAL MICHIGAN: $36k → 14%BHK COMMUNITY ACTION: $126k → 14%THE HARBOR: $38k → 10%COMMUNITY ACTION OF SOUTH CENTRAL MICHIGAN: $35k → 14%BHK COMMUNITY ACTION: $99k → 14%THE HARBOR: $36k → 10%COMMUNITY ACTION OF SOUTH CENTRAL MICHIGAN: $35k → 14%BHK COMMUNITY ACTION: $72k → 14%THE HARBOR: $33k → 10%THE HARBOR: $27k → 10%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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.4M · 8 repeat orgs$160k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +16% since the first grant, against +9% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
3

Total granted

$2.4M
$155k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+16%
+9%

Still filing today

75%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesCommunity ImprovementHealthHousing & ShelterFood & NutritionOther
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

  • BC
    BARAGA-HOUGHTON-KEWEENAW COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $820k · revenue +28%
  • CY
    COMPREHENSIVE YOUTH SERVICES INC
    8× · 2018–2025 · $446k · revenue +14%
  • CA
    COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY OF SOUTH CENTRAL MICHIGAN
    6× · 2020–2025 · $292k · revenue +11%

Funded once

  • TY
    THE YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF THE BLUE WATER AREA
    one grant, 2023 · $114k · revenue +9%
  • MF
    MACOMB FOOD PROGRAM
    one grant, 2021 · $24k · revenue 0%
  • GC
    GOGEBIC-ONTONAGON COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY
    one grant, 2024 · $16k · revenue +14%
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
Mid Michigan Community Action Agency Inc

Mid michigan community action guides local residents on the path to self-sufficiency through empowerment, education and community enrichment.

—
2
Indiana County Community Action Program

Provide resources for low income clients.

Human Services
3
Community Action Agency of Northwest Alabama Inc

Our mission is to reduce the causes and adverse consequences of poverty and to empower low-income individuals, families and communities to achieve self-sufficiency through advocacy, resource utilization and service delivery.

—
4
Allegan County Resource Development Committee Inc

Community Action of Allegan County will serve, advocate, and engage individuals, families, and communities to overcome the effects of poverty and encourage self-reliance.

Human Services
5
Area Agency On Aging of Western Michigan Inc

Through internal expertise, external partnerships, and advocacy, the area agency on aging of western michigan provides older adults, adults with disabilities, and their caregivers equitable access to services that promote independence and…

Human Services
6
Armstrong County Community Action Agency

Provide service and assistance to low income residents of armstrong county.

Human Services
7
Community Action Agency

Promote self sufficiency within Jackson, Lenawee and Hillsdale Counties.

Human Services
8
Combined Community Action Inc

To provide assistance to low-income families through various social programs related to nutrition, weatherization, utility assistance, housing, and other various programs.

Human Services
9
Community Action Commission of Belmont County

Community assistance

Human Services
10
Community Action Agency of Southern New Mexico Inc

Caasnm is a 60 year-old new mexico statewide health and social services not for profit with a mission of uplifting low-income families by connecting communities, encouraging family wellness, empowering families, and bridging resources.

Human Services
11
Community Action Commission of Fayette County

Administers grants and contracts to help the lives of those individuals who fall below the poverty level.

—
12
Community Action Agency of South Alabama Inc

Administration of federal, state and local awards and grants for the poverty sector of a 7 county area in alabama, providing headstart education, food, shelter, maintenance, and weatherization programs.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chippewa-Luce-Mackinac Community Action Human Resource Authorityinc; the most unlike its peers is Helping Hands Ministries. 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

11 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. 11 of the 12 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/11
Grantees still filing
9/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BARAGA-HOUGHTON-KEWEENAW COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY INC: $820,027 · Human ServicesBARAGA-HOUGHTON-KEWEENAW COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY INCCOMPREHENSIVE YOUTH SERVICES INC: $445,705 · Human ServicesCOMPREHENSIVE YOUTH SERVICES INCCOMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY OF SOUTH CENTRAL MICHIGAN: $291,570 · Human ServicesCOMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY OF SOUTH CENTRAL MICHIGANHuman Development Commission: $58,571 · Human Services+1 more: $16,341 · Human ServicesOTTAWA COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S OFFICE: $355,683 · OtherOTTAWA COUNTY ADMINIS…THE YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF THE BLUE WATER AREA: $114,392 · OtherTHE YOUNG MEN'S CHRIS…+1 more: $5,100 · OtherDetroit Rescue Mission Ministries: $268,814 · HealthDetroit Resc…SOUTHWEST MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY: $95,071 · Community ImprovementHELPING HANDS MINISTRIES: $31,380 · Housing & ShelterMACOMB FOOD PROGRAM: $24,435 · Food & Nutrition
Human Services$1,632,214Other$475,175Health$268,814Community Improvement$95,071Housing & Shelter$31,380Food & Nutrition$24,435

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 budgetBARAGA-HOUGHTON-KEWEENAW COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY INC: $820,027 over 6y, 11% of budgetCOMPREHENSIVE YOUTH SERVICES INC: $445,705 over 8y, 2.5% of budgetCOMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY OF SOUTH CENTRAL MICHIGAN: $291,570 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetDetroit Rescue Mission Ministries: $268,814 over 7y, 0.5% of budgetTHE YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF THE BLUE WATER AREA: $114,392 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetSOUTHWEST MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY: $95,071 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetHuman Development Commission: $58,571 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetHELPING HANDS MINISTRIES: $31,380 over 3y, 4.9% of budgetMACOMB FOOD PROGRAM: $24,435 over 1y, 20% of budgetGOGEBIC-ONTONAGON COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY: $16,341 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.

Michigan Community Ac…Feeding America West …Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Michigan Community Action IncMI20× affinity7 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Michigan Community Action Inc · Feeding America West Michigan · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Blue Water Community Action funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Blue Water Community Action. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    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 12 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 Blue Water Community Action’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