· Community foundation
Canton Community Foundation Inc
Helping people achieve their philanthropic goals that reflect the values and interests that enhance their community.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 112 grants below total $1,234,019 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $2,101,690 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $867,671 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k62 grants · $469k
- $10k–50k50 grants · $765k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| FIRST STEP-WAYNE COUNTY PROJECT | $41,020 |
| SALVATION ARMY | $24,000 |
| CAMP CASEY | $23,170 |
| THE BOTTOMLESS TOY CHEST | $22,691 |
| UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN | $21,000 |
| VARIETY THE CHILDREN'S CHARITY | $21,000 |
| NEW HOPE CENTER FOR GRIEF SUPPORT | $19,600 |
| NEW DAY FOUNDATION FOR FAMILIES | $19,500 |
| HIGH 5 | $19,420 |
| FLEECE AND THANK YOU | $19,000 |
| GIRLS MATTER | $18,481 |
| PROJECT FEED THE KIDS | $18,000 |
| LOST VOICES | $17,965 |
| GIFTS FOR ALL GOD'S CHILDREN | $17,035 |
| REDFORD BRIGHTMOOR INITIATIVE | $17,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $909k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 55% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein 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 — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +12% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
106 repeat relationships — 87 still active in FY2025, 19 since wound down; 22 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $201k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- FSFirst Step The Western Wayne County Project Domestic Assault9× · 2017–2025 · $135k · revenue +37%
- GMGIRLS MATTER3× · 2023–2025 · $68k · revenue +31%
- CCCAMP CASEY CORPORATION3× · 2023–2025 · $68k · revenue +8%
Funded once
- GWGROWTH WORKS INCone grant, 2022 · $47k · revenue +17%
- PTPLYMOUTH TOWNSHIPone grant, 2023 · $20k
- TKTHE KIRK GIBSON FOUNDATION FORone grant, 2021 · $20k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
To ensure all michigan children and youth with emotional, behavioral, or mental health challenges and their families live in a safe, welcoming community with access to needed services and supports.
We empower children to overcome challenges.
To be a champion for parents of children in the community.
To ensure that policymakers prioritize the needs of the most challenged children from cradle to career.
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.
Touching hearts, teaching minds, changing lives
Michigan Family Resources mission is to deliver holistic family-centered services to children that promote their well-being and development.
To provide education and consultations that are family-centered and to ensure continued family involvement in mental health care through advocacy and provider network.
The mission of the ROCK Center for Youth Development is to "Build hope and resilience in youth based on a foundation of acceptance, support, and respect that results in positive life choices."
Growing hope through love is organized as a child welfare agency that maintains a child placing agency license through the department of child welfare licensing and contracts with michigan department of health and human services to license…
To strengthen, nuture and empower children and families for a brighter future by providing programs that preserve the dignity and enhance the well-being of families throughout michigan's upper peninsula, in a caring, compassionate and…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Rainbow Connection and the most unlike its peers is The Rock of Kingsley Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 24 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 17% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
127 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 127 of the 164 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
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 First Step The Western Wayne County Project Domestic Assault ↗
- Who funds GIRLS MATTER ↗
- Who funds CAMP CASEY CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds NEW HOPE CENTER FOR GRIEF SUPPORT INC ↗
- Who funds LIVING & LEARNING ENRICHMENT CENTER ↗
- Who funds VARIETY CLUB CHARITY FOR CHILDREN DBA VARIETY THE CHILDREN'S CHARITY ↗
- Who funds THE NEW DAY FOUNDATION FOR FAMILIES ↗
- Who funds THE CHRIST CHILD SOCIETY OF DETROIT ↗
- Who funds BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK INC ↗
- Who funds BEYOND BASICS ↗
- Who funds EMILY ANN GRIFFIN FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE NEW COMMON SCHOOL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GROWTH WORKS INC ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S LEUKEMIA FOUNDATION OF MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds REDFORD BRIGHTMOOR INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds GIFTS FOR ALL GODS CHILDREN ↗
- Who funds CARING ATHLETES TEAM FOR CHILDREN'S AND HENRY FORD HOSPITALS ↗
- Who funds LIFELABKIDS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE BOTTOMLESS TOY CHEST INC ↗
- Who funds LOST VOICES ↗
- Who funds THE MIDNIGHT GOLF PROGRAM ↗
- Who funds MITTENS FOR DETROIT INC ↗
- Who funds BRILLIANT DETROIT ↗
- Who funds GILDA'S CLUB METRO DETROIT ↗
- Who funds DOWNTOWN BOXING GYM YOUTH PROGRAM ↗
- Who funds PARTNERSHIP FOR THE ARTS AND HUMANITIES INC ↗
- Who funds Penrickton Center for Blind Children ↗
- Who funds HIGHER HOPES ↗
- Who funds GIGI'S PLAYHOUSE INC ↗
- Who funds Humble Design Inc ↗
- Who funds CHILD SAFE MICHIGAN ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Eagles for Children · Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan · Children's Hospital of Michigan Foundation · United Way for Southeastern Michigan · Dte Energy Foundation · The Barton Malow Foundation · The Carls Foundation · Ford Philanthropy · Phillip and Elizabeth Filmer Memorial · Grand Traverse Regional Community Foundation · Consumers Energy Foundation · Detroit Industrial School
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 organization Canton Community Foundation Inc 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.
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 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Canton Community Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Canton Community Foundation Inc through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.