Skip to content
Dr William F and Mabel E Nill Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Dr William F and Mabel E Nill Foundation Inc

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$2k
Granted FY2024still arriving
5
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$500
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Health$31kFood & Nutrition$12kYouth Development$12kHuman Services$11kHousing & Shelter$11kEducation$2kCommunity Improvement$2kArts & Culture$1kOther$0
02FY2024 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$250
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PURPLE ROSE THEATER$500
ALTERNATIVES FOR GIRLS$250
GROSSE POINTE ANIMAL ADOPTION SOCIETY$250
HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN$250
POTTER PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY$250
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 (FY17–24, $14k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 93% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN: $3k → 10%HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN: $3k → 10%HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN: $3k → 10%LEADER DOGS FOR THE BLIND: $1k → 8%HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN: $800 → 10%HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN: $800 → 10%HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN: $250 → 10%WIGS 4 KIDS: $2k → 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.

83%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$69k · 8 repeat orgs$14k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +99% since the first grant, against +47% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
10

Total granted

$69k
$14k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+99%
+47%

Still filing today

63%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 67% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $500 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthHuman ServicesHousing & ShelterAnimalsPhilanthropyOther
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

  • ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC
    5× · 2017–2022 · $13k · revenue +145%
  • ALTERNATIVES FOR GIRLS
    6× · 2017–2024 · $12k · revenue +150%
  • HO
    Hospice of Michigan Inc
    6× · 2019–2024 · $12k · revenue +30%

Funded once

  • MA
    MAKE A WISH MICHIGAN
    one grant, 2017 · $3k
  • SA
    SALVATION ARMY
    one grant, 2017 · $2k
  • TR
    THE RAINBOW CONNECTIONgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $2k · revenue +58%
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
Michigan Humane Society

To improve and save lives through compassionate care, community engagement and advocacy for animals.

Animals
2
Organ Procurement Agency of Michigan

We honor life through donation.

—
3
Michigan Anti-Cruelty Society

To maintain and operate a hospital, ambulance and veterinary services for the care of animals. the maintenance and operation of kennels and suitable chambers for the humane destruction of wounded animals.

Animals
4
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
5
Epilepsy Foundation of Michigan

The epilepsy foundation of michigan leads the fight to overcome the challenges of living with epilepsy and to accelerate therapies to stop seizures, find cures, and save lives.

Health
6
Wings of Hope Hospice & Palliative Care Inc

Hospice care - wings of hope hospice and palliative care, inc. provides compassionate care in the later stages of life and support through the grief experience for individuals and families.

Human Services
7
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.…

—
8
Mymichigan Medical Center Midland

Creating healthy communities - together

Health
9
Mymichigan Medical Group

Creating healthy communities - together

Health
10
Mymichigan Health Foundation

The corporation is organized and shall be operated exclusively for charitable, educational and scientific purposes by conducting or supporting activites exclusively for the benefit of, to perform the functions of, or to carry out the…

Health
11
Michigan Peer Review Organization

Helping healthcare get better. MPRO has more than 40 years of experience improving healthcare across the continuum of care using evidence-based and data-driven logic. MPRO also has extensive expertise in completing thoughtful and impartial…

Health
12
Michigan Biotechnology Institute

Bridging the gap between early-stage innovation and commercial application. partnering to de-risk, develop and scale-up discoveries into commercially-viable technology packages.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Alternatives for Girls; the most unlike its peers is Meadowbrook Center for Learning Differences. 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

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 20 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)
12/12
Grantees still filing
10/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CAPUCHIN SOUP KITCHEN: $12,350 · OtherCAPUCHIN SOUP KITCHENMAKE A WISH MICHIGAN: $2,500 · OtherMAKE A WISH MICHIGANSALVATION ARMY: $2,000 · OtherSALVATION ARMYMEADOWBROOK CENTER FOR LEARNING DIFFERENCES: $2,000 · OtherMEADOWBROOK CENTER FOR LEARNING …UTICA SHELBY ROTARY CLUB: $1,500 · OtherUTICA SHELBY ROTARY CLUBPURPLE ROSE THEATER: $1,300 · OtherPURPLE ROSE THEATERAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $1,000 · OtherC4 INITIATIVE: $800 · Other+1 more: $500 · OtherALTERNATIVES FOR GIRLS: $11,800 · Housing & ShelterALTERNATIVES FOR GIRLSBUILDING HOMES FOR HEROES INC: $10,550 · Housing & ShelterBUILDING HOMES FOR HEROES INCST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $12,550 · HealthST JUDE CHILDREN'S R…THE RAINBOW CONNECTION: $2,000 · HealthTHE RAINBOW CONNECTI…+1 more: $200 · HealthHospice of Michigan Inc: $11,600 · Human ServicesHospice of Michigan…MAGGIE'S WIGS4KIDS OF MICHIGAN INC: $1,500 · Human ServicesMAGGIE'S WIGS4KIDS …LEADER DOGS FOR THE BLIND: $1,040 · Human ServicesLEADER DOGS FOR THE…GARY SINISE FOUNDATION: $7,300 · PhilanthropyGARY SINI…POTTER PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $250 · AnimalsGROSSE POINTE ANIMAL ADOPTION SOCIETY: $250 · Animals
Other$23,950Housing & Shelter$22,350Health$14,750Human Services$14,140Philanthropy$7,300Animals$500

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 budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $12,550 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetALTERNATIVES FOR GIRLS: $11,800 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetHospice of Michigan Inc: $11,600 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetBUILDING HOMES FOR HEROES INC: $10,550 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetGARY SINISE FOUNDATION: $7,300 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE RAINBOW CONNECTION: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMEADOWBROOK CENTER FOR LEARNING DIFFERENCES: $2,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetLEADER DOGS FOR THE BLIND: $1,040 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPOTTER PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGROSSE POINTE ANIMAL ADOPTION SOCIETY: $250 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

Floyd B & Helen M Tho…Barbara J Weidemann F…Community Foundation …Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Floyd B & Helen M Thormann Foundation IncMI20× affinity7 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Floyd B & Helen M Thormann Foundation Inc · Barbara J Weidemann Foundation Inc · Community Foundation for Southeast 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 Dr William F and Mabel E Nill Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Dr William F and Mabel E Nill Foundation 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%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report 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 Dr William F and Mabel E Nill Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Dr William F and Mabel E Nill 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.

    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 20 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Dr William F and Mabel E Nill’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