Skip to content
Char-Em United Way Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Char-Em United Way Inc

Char-Em United Way serves as a catalyst to develop new strategies and services to meet currently unmet needs, primarily in the areas of education, income stability, and community health.

$105k
Granted FY2021
6
Grants FY2021
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 2021.

Human Services$298kEducation$100kEmployment$97kFood & Nutrition$93kHealth$37kHousing & Shelter$33kYouth Development$28k
02FY2021 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 6 grants below total $100,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $105,003 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $5,003 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.
$20,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Northwest Michigan Works$25,000
Great Start Collaborative$20,000
Salvation Army$20,000
Womens Resource Center of Nor$15,000
Manna$10,000
NW MI Habitat for Humanity$10,000
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 (FY17–21, $320k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 93% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%Northwest Community Action Agency: $50k → 9%Catholic Human Services: $9k → 7%Great Start Collaborative: $50k → 9%Northwest Community Action Agency: $50k → 9%Catholic Human Services: $7k → 7%Great Start Collaborative: $20k → 9%Catholic Human Services: $6k → 7%Great Start Collaborative: $20k → 9%Womens Resource Center of Northern Michigan: $21k → 9%Womens Resource Center of Northern Michigan: $20k → 9%Womens Resource Center of Nor: $15k → 9%Womens Resource Center of Nor: $15k → 9%Womens Resource Center of Nor: $13k → 9%YMCA of Northern Michigan: $10k → 9%YMCA of Northern Michigan: $8k → 9%YMCA of Northern Michigan: $6k → 9%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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$679k · 10 repeat orgs$8k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2021, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
1

Total granted

$679k
$8k

Still filing today

90%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2021, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21
Human ServicesEmploymentOther
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

  • NM
    NORTHWEST MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ACTION
    5× · 2017–2021 · $190k · revenue +35%
  • WR
    Womens Resource Center of Northern Michigan Inc
    5× · 2017–2021 · $84k · revenue +105%
  • TM
    THE MANNA FOOD PROJECT INC DBA - THE MANNA FOOD PROJECT
    5× · 2017–2021 · $75k · revenue +23%

Funded once

  • HD
    Health Department of Northwest Michigan
    one grant, 2017 · $8k
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
Northern Homes Community Development Corporation

To create and preserve quality affordable housing options for northern michigan residents through education, development, and partnering with local communities.

Human Services
2
Northwest Michigan Rural Housing Partnership

To help provide safe, accessible, and affordable housing in Northwest Michigan.

Housing & Shelter
3
Northwest Michigan Supportive Housing

To provide housing and case management services for the homeless and mentally ill within the community.

Human Services
4
United Way of Northeast Michigan

Support other community human service agencies through mini grant process and to facilitate programs to meet the needs of the communities the organization serves.

Philanthropy
5
211 Northeast Michigan

To provide Northeast Michigan with referrals and information to assist with essential needs.

Community Improvement
6
Northfields Human Services Inc Whitmore Lake Area Human Services

Provides non-emergency transportation and food assistance to needy residents of whitmore lake, michigan and the surrounding areas.

Human Services
7
Northwest Michigan Health Services Inc

To provide quality medical and dental primary care services to persons of all ages in northwest michigan regardless of ability to pay.

Health
8
Goodwill Industries of Northern Michigan Inc

We bring food to neighbors, help vulnerable people find home, and provide empowering employment through our community-supported social enterprise and collaborative partnerships.the 2023 990 was for 10/1-12/31/23 due to an accounting period…

Employment
9
Gw Homeless Services of Northern Michigan Inc

The mission of gw homeless services of northern michigan, inc is to provide safe, supportive shelter to individuals experiencing homelessness.the 2023 990 was for 10/1-12/31/23 due to an accounting period change.

Human Services
10
Northern Family Intervention Services Inc

To provide in-home and in-school intervention, treatment and crisis counseling to youth and families in northern michigan and to assure that children are safe in their homes.

—
11
Northeast Michigan Family Resource Center Inc

Provide support services for families and children.

—
12
Michigan Christian Home

The michigan christian home dba beacon hill at eastgate, a not-for-profit corporation, provides housing and health services in a christian environment for older adults, thus enabling them to meet their ongoing physical, social and…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northwest Michigan Community Action; the most unlike its peers is Big Brothers Big Sisters of Northwe. 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

9 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. 9 of the 11 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)
9/9
Grantees still filing
8/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NORTHWEST MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ACTION: $190,294 · Human ServicesNORTHWEST MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ACTIONWomens Resource Center of Northern Michigan Inc: $83,545 · Human ServicesWomens Resource Center of Northern Michigan IncSTATE YOUNG MENS CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF MICHIGAN: $24,000 · Human ServicesSTATE YOUNG MENS CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF MICHIGANCATHOLIC HUMAN SERVICES INC: $22,263 · Human ServicesCATHOLIC HUMAN SERVICES INCSALVATION ARMY SOCIAL SERVICES OF KENT COUNTY: $96,300 · OtherSALVATION ARMY SOCIAL SERVICES OF KENT …THE MANNA FOOD PROJECT INC DBA - THE MANNA FOOD PROJECT: $75,471 · OtherTHE MANNA FOOD PROJECT INC DBA - THE MA…NORTHWEST MI HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $32,500 · OtherNORTHWEST MI HABITAT FOR HUMANITYBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF NORTHWE: $28,000 · OtherBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF NORTHWE+1 more: $7,500 · OtherNORTHWEST MICHIGAN WORKS INC: $65,000 · EmploymentNORTHWEST MICHIGAN W…BERGMANN CENTER INC: $61,654 · EmploymentBERGMANN CENTER INC
Human Services$320,102Other$239,771Employment$126,654

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNORTHWEST MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ACTION: $190,294 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetWomens Resource Center of Northern Michigan Inc: $83,545 over 5y, 0.7% of budgetTHE MANNA FOOD PROJECT INC DBA - THE MANNA FOOD PROJECT: $75,471 over 5y, 1.0% of budgetNORTHWEST MICHIGAN WORKS INC: $65,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetBERGMANN CENTER INC: $61,654 over 4y, 2.0% of budgetNORTHWEST MI HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $32,500 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF NORTHWE: $28,000 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetSTATE YOUNG MENS CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF MICHIGAN: $24,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetCATHOLIC HUMAN SERVICES INC: $22,263 over 3y, 0.2% 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.

Petoskey-Harbor Sprin…Grand Traverse Region…Consumers Energy Foun…Charlevoix County Com…DTE Energy FoundationThe Offield Family Fo…Morgan Stanley Global…National Philanthropi…Natl Christian Charit…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Petoskey-Harbor Springs Area Community FoundationMI19.9× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Petoskey-Harbor Springs Area Community Foundation · Grand Traverse Regional Community Foundation · Consumers Energy Foundation · Charlevoix County Community Foundation · DTE Energy Foundation · The Offield Family Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Char-Em United Way Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Char-Em United Way Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%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
    2report 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 11 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 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2022) is on record and reports $371k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2021, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Char-Em United Way’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