Skip to content

· Private foundation

David and Barbara Whitwam Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$80k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Arts & Culture$165kReligion$125kPhilanthropy$115kEducation$40kCommunity Improvement$35kHealth$25kHuman Services$23kHousing & Shelter$3kOther$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$25,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$826k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SILVER BEACH SHADOWLAND$50,000
UNITED WAY OF SOUTHWEST MICHIGAN$25,000
CORNERSTONE ALLIANCE$5,000
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 (FY23–23, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%READINESS CENTER INC: $1k → 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.

77%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$418k · 8 repeat orgs$126k to everyone else

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
10

Total granted

$418k
$76k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-1%
+76%

Still filing today

63%
30%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 38% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $50k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Community ImprovementPhilanthropyArts & CultureHousing & ShelterHealthHuman ServicesOther
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

  • CL
    CHRIST LUTHERAN CHURCH
    3× · 2019–2021 · $125k
  • UW
    UNITED WAY OF SOUTHWEST MICHIGAN
    6× · 2020–2025 · $115k · revenue -34%
  • AI
    ARTIS-NAPLES INC
    4× · 2019–2022 · $90k · revenue -1%

Funded once

  • TM
    THE MORGRIDGE INSTITUTE FOUNDATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue +134%
  • UC
    UNIFIED CIVIC MONUMENTS PROJECT
    one grant, 2023 · $25k
  • AA
    ATTIC ANGELS FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $10k
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
Lakeshore Community Foundation Inc

Mission statement: to gather, grow, and give endowed charitable financial resources to build stronger, more vibrant communities now and into the future.value statement:we are committed to managing our clients' philanthropic endowments in…

Philanthropy
2
The Northern Michigan University Foundation

The nmu foundation will establish and foster relationships to generate resources that benefit the strategic goals of northern michigan university.

Education
3
Business Leaders for Michigan Foundation

Business leaders for michigan is a nonprofit, nonpartisan statewide organization driven by ceos from the state's leading employers, all working toward a shared goal: making michigan a top 10 state for jobs, talent and a thriving economy.…

Community Improvement
4
Lake Superior Community Partnership Inc

To stimulate and sustain a vibrant regional economy by facilitating economic growth and prosperity.

—
5
Business Leaders for Michigan

Business leaders for michigan is a nonprofit, nonpartisan statewide organization driven by ceos from the state's leading employers, all working toward a shared goal: making michigan a top 10 state for jobs, talent and a thriving economy.…

—
6
University of Minnesota Foundation Investment Advisors

To provide the highest level of stewardship for university donors through professional management and oversight of the university of minnesota foundation's assets by creating a focused investment environment with clarity of purpose,…

Education
7
Michigan Science Center

The mission of the michigan science center is to inspire curious minds of all ages to discover, explore and appreciate science, technology, engineering and math in a creative, dynamic learning environment.

Education
8
Southwest Michigan Regional Chamber Foundation

To empower the region's business community through leadership, business and community development.

Community Improvement
9
Michigan Education Excellence Foundation

Dedicated to supporting innovative, transformative learning for all students in michigan. the foundation collects, invests, and distributes funds to board designated initiatives, like the detroit promise, as part of our mission to improve…

Education
10
Lake Superior State University Foundation

The Lake Superior State University Foundation exists for the sole purpose of promoting, receiving, managing, and disbursing donations and contributions for the benefit of Lake Superior State University.

Education
11
Michigan Chamber Foundation

1) to plan and conduct nonpartisan public education programs regarding free enterprise, productivity and basic economic issues affecting the state of michigan.2) to establish and operate a leadership institute designed to provide promising…

Arts & Culture
12
The Center for Michigan

For all state residents, diverse civic stakeholders and philanthropy, the center for michigan (the center) and its nonprofit newsrooms - bridge michigan and bridgedetroit - make michigan better through high-quality, nonpartisan journalism…

Public Benefit
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is United Way of Southwest Michigan; the most unlike its peers is Artis-Naples Inc. 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 19 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
5/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CHRIST LUTHERAN CHURCH: $125,000 · OtherCHRIST LUTHERAN CHURCHLAKE MICHIGAN COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $26,000 · OtherLAKE MICHIGAN COLLEGE FOUNDATIONUNIFIED CIVIC MONUMENTS PROJECT: $25,000 · OtherUNIFIED CIVIC MONUMENTS PROJECTLORY'S PLACE: $11,283 · OtherLORY'S PLACEATTIC ANGELS FOUNDATION: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · Other+5 more: $4,000 · OtherUNITED WAY OF SOUTHWEST MICHIGAN: $115,000 · PhilanthropyUNITED WAY OF SOUTHWEST MI…LAKESHORE EXCELLENCE FOUNDATION: $13,500 · PhilanthropyLAKESHORE EXCELLENCE FOUND…ARTIS-NAPLES INC: $90,000 · Arts & CultureARTIS-NAPLES INCSILVER BEACH SHADOWLAND: $50,000 · Community ImprovementSILVER BEACH SHAD…CORNERSTONE ALLIANCE: $35,000 · Community ImprovementCORNERSTONE ALLIA…THE MORGRIDGE INSTITUTE FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 · HealthHOMES FOR OUR TROOPS INC: $3,000 · Housing & ShelterREADINESS CENTER INC: $1,000 · Human Services
Other$211,283Philanthropy$128,500Arts & Culture$90,000Community Improvement$85,000Health$25,000Housing & Shelter$3,000Human Services$1,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUNITED WAY OF SOUTHWEST MICHIGAN: $115,000 over 6y, 0.7% of budgetARTIS-NAPLES INC: $90,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetCORNERSTONE ALLIANCE: $35,000 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetLAKE MICHIGAN COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $26,000 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetTHE MORGRIDGE INSTITUTE FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLAKESHORE EXCELLENCE FOUNDATION: $13,500 over 2y, 3.5% of budgetHOMES FOR OUR TROOPS INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetREADINESS CENTER INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.3% 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 UNITED WAY OF SOUTHWEST MICHIGAN ↗
  • Who funds ARTIS-NAPLES INC ↗
  • Who funds SILVER BEACH SHADOWLAND ↗
  • Who funds CORNERSTONE ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds LAKE MICHIGAN COLLEGE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE MORGRIDGE INSTITUTE FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds LAKESHORE EXCELLENCE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds HOMES FOR OUR TROOPS INC ↗
  • Who funds READINESS CENTER INC ↗

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.

Berrien Community Foundation IncMI17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Berrien Community Foundation Inc · The Marzke Family Foundation · 1st Source Bank Foundation Inc Xxx-Xx-Xxxx · 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 David and Barbara Whitwam Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from David and Barbara Whitwam Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to David and Barbara Whitwam Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to David and Barbara Whitwam Foundation 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.

    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 19 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-PF 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 David and Barbara Whitwam’s filings →

    More from the funding graph