Skip to content
Detroit2nepal Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Detroit2nepal Foundation

D2NS mission is to provide sustainable support to grassroots, community-based programs in Detroit neighborhoods and remote villages in Nepal.

$46k
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$13k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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 2024.

Education$265kYouth Development$203kCommunity Improvement$115kEnvironment$39kHealth$30kRecreation & Sports$16k
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $32,500, the rows itemized in this filing. The $46,300 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $13,800 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.
$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$797k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FIGURE SKATING IN DETROIT$12,500
BLACK LEADERS DETROIT$10,000
BUILDING BETTER MEN PROGRAM$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 (FY17–17, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 21%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%CODY ROUGE COMMUNITY ACTION ALLIANCE: $10k → 21%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 24% of Detroit2nepal Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 100% of the giving stays in MI; by stated purpose, 76%.

Detroit2nepal Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

80%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$537k · 7 repeat orgs$131k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
5

Total granted

$537k
$119k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+16%
+85%

Still filing today

86%
80%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 62% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Youth DevelopmentCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesEmploymentEnvironmentHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • BRILLIANT DETROIT
    2× · 2022–2023 · $265k · revenue +16%
  • BB
    BUILDING BETTER MEN
    8× · 2017–2024 · $96k · revenue +4% · 40% of their budget
  • Avalon Village Inc
    5× · 2017–2021 · $61k · revenue +582%

Funded once

  • S
    SOULARDARITYgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $39k · revenue +85%
  • MT
    MODERN TRIBE COMMUNICATIONS INC
    one grant, 2020 · $33k
  • SD
    SAY DETROIT
    one grant, 2020 · $30k · revenue -7%
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
Dream of Detroit

Dream of Detroit is combining community organizing with strategic housing and land development to build a healthy community and empower a marginalized neighborhood on the Westside of Detroit.

Human Services
2
About Face Detroit
—
3
Progressionista

Progressionista serves Detroit girls ages 8-12 with literacy and mentorship programming and provides annually 250 books in total for participants to keep, in-person masterclasses with women professionals, hands-on career projects, and…

Youth Development
4
New Hope Community Development

A neighborhood based housing and development Corporation with the purpose of revializing the detroit area, by providubg affordable housing to persons of low and moderate incomes and providing youth development and networking.

Housing & Shelter
5
Brilliant Cities

To cultivate Kid Success Cities full of opportunities for young children and families. Brilliant Cities is a nationwide model that transforms houses into community hubs where children 08 are school-ready, healthy, and supported.

Community Improvement
6
Detroit Justice Center

The Detroit Justice Center works alongside communities to create economic opportunities, transform the justice system, and promote equitable and just cities.

Crime & Legal
7
Arise Detroit

To inspire a community of active engagement, personal responsibility and hope by connecting people to opportunities and resources to transform the quality of life for all Detroiters.

Community Improvement
8
Do Good Detroit

At Do Good Detroit, we believe that "good" is more than just a word-it's the driving force behind our mission. We are dedicated to creating a thriving community where compassion, empowerment, and intergenerational collaboration are at the…

—
9
The Detroit Equity Report Inc

To promote equality and inclusion in society.

Employment
10
Summer in the City

Summer in the City strives to improve and expand community service in Metro Detroit. By bringing a diverse group of young people together to invest their energy in Detroit, Summer in the City programs address the immediate needs of city…

Philanthropy
11
Grand 7 Detroit Incorporated

Neighborhood transformation, blight removal and housing rehabilitation.

Community Improvement
12
Cinema Detroit

Motion picture exhibition

Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Brilliant Detroit; the most unlike its peers is Building Better Men. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

12 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. 12 of the 13 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/12
Grantees still filing
8/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BRILLIANT DETROIT: $265,337 · Youth DevelopmentBRILLIANT DETROITBUILDING BETTER MEN: $96,375 · Youth DevelopmentBUILDING BETTER MENAvalon Village Inc: $61,011 · Youth DevelopmentAvalon Village Inc+1 more: $12,500 · Youth DevelopmentBLACK LEADERS DETROIT: $45,773 · EmploymentMODERN TRIBE COMMUNICATIONS INC: $32,576 · OtherMODERN TRIB…CityLight: $6,925 · OtherCityLightFIGURE SKATING IN HARLEM INC: $18,100 · OtherFIGURE SKAT…Cody Rouge Community Action Alliance: $9,950 · OtherCody Rouge …SOULARDARITY: $39,008 · EnvironmentBUCKETS OF RAIN: $30,380 · InternationalSAY DETROIT: $30,159 · Housing & ShelterNORTH END WOODWARD COMMUNITY COALITION: $20,000 · Community Improvement
Youth Development$435,223Employment$45,773Other$67,551Environment$39,008International$30,380Housing & Shelter$30,159Community Improvement$20,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBRILLIANT DETROIT: $265,337 over 2y, 3.8% of budgetBUILDING BETTER MEN: $96,375 over 8y, 40% of budgetAvalon Village Inc: $61,011 over 5y, 20% of budgetBLACK LEADERS DETROIT: $45,773 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetSOULARDARITY: $39,008 over 1y, 5.3% of budgetBUCKETS OF RAIN: $30,380 over 2y, 15% of budgetSAY DETROIT: $30,159 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetNORTH END WOODWARD COMMUNITY COALITION: $20,000 over 2y, 4.9% of budgetFIGURE SKATING IN HARLEM INC: $18,100 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetCityLight: $6,925 over 1y, 8.4% 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.

The Skillman Foundati…Community Foundation …The Ford FoundationSay Detroit
The Skillman FoundationMI17.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Skillman Foundation · Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan · The Ford Foundation · Say Detroit

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 Detroit2nepal Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Detroit2nepal Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%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 · 0–60%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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 Detroit2nepal Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Detroit2nepal 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 13 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Detroit2nepal’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