How much did EAGLES FOR CHILDREN grant in FY2021?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 54% of EAGLES FOR CHILDREN’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2019

developmentalcommunication

2020

nurturewomenfinancialtreatmentoffersservesfacing

2021

hope healingpartnershiphuron valleyoffersfacingraisingserves

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2021 · 70 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2021

Under $10k40 grants · $315k
$10k–50k30 grants · $444k

$9,500

Median grant

States reached

$21k

Total assets

Largest grants

EMILY ANN GRIFFIN FOUNDATION$27,000
NEW DAY FOUNDATION FOR FAMILIES$26,000
CAMP CASEY$25,621
GIRLS MATTER SURVIVING THE SOCIAL JUNGLE$22,596
VARIETY$22,000
GENESIS THE CHURCH$21,000
REDFORD BRIGHTMOOR INIT$19,500
METHODIST CHILDREN'S HOME SOCIETY$18,700
LIVING & LEARNING ENRICHMENT$18,387
LOST VOICES$15,000
GIFTS FOR ALL GOD'S CHILDREN$14,806
GIGI'S PLAYHOUSE DETROIT$14,700
MITTENS FOR DETROIT INC$12,500
HOUSE OF PROVIDENCE$12,500
BOTTOMLESS TOY CHEST$12,068

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–21, $379k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11% — the area typically sits at 11%. 27% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; 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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

Where the work is directed

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

About 6% of EAGLES FOR CHILDREN’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 99% of the giving stays in MI; read by stated purpose it is 93% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

EAGLES FOR CHILDRENlessmore of its giving

Placed by recipient address · 2.7% directed abroad (not shown)

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 foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$1.8M · 62 repeat orgs$430k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +46% since the first grant, against +25% for the ones you funded once.

62 repeat relationships — 50 still active in FY2021, 12 since wound down; 20 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$1.8M

$232k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+46%

+25%

Still filing today

58%

31%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2021, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $197k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Human ServicesYouth DevelopmentHealthEducationRecreation & SportsArts & CultureOther

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

CC
CAMP CASEY
5× · 2017–2021 · $97k · revenue +82%
JC
JUDSON CENTER
5× · 2017–2021 · $50k · revenue +8%
GF
GIFTS FOR ALL GOD'S CHILDREN
4× · 2018–2021 · $43k · revenue +22%

Funded once

LO
LIGHTHOUSE OF OAKLAND CO
2× · 2017–2018 · $18k
SR
SOUTH REDFORD FOUNDATION FOR EXCELLENCE
2× · 2017–2018 · $18k
GP
GRACE & PEACE COMMUNITY CHURCHLEAP INTO LEARNING
one grant, 2020 · $16k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

Children's Hospital of Michigan

To support pediatric research, education, community benefit programs, and other (see sch o) initiatives to improve the health of children in michigan.

Health

West Michigan Miracle League

Provide opportunities for children with disabilities to play baseball

Human Services

Association for Children's Mental Health

To help all michigan children and youth with emotional, behavioral, or mental health challenges.

Health

Detroit Parent Network

A network of parents working to build and engage parents and others to ensure every child has a champion.

Human Services

Children's Leukemia Foundation of Michig

To ensure the emotional, social and financial stability of michigan patients and families as they navigate their blood cancer journey. significant program activities include disease education and resources, emotional support and case…

Health

The Detroit Institute for Children

We empower children to overcome challenges.

Health

The Childrens Advocacy Centers of

Our mission is to unify and strengthen michigan's response to child victims of abuse through sustainable growth, collaboration, and empowerment of children's advocacy centers (cacs). our vision is that all of michigan's children will have…

Crime & Legal

Community Pride Mi

Public Benefit

Michigan Child Care Centers Inc

Providing day care for children ranging from two weeks to tweleve years of age

—

Michigan Casa Inc

Michigan casa, inc. is dedicated to changing the lives of abused and neglected children by advocating for their best interests through establishing, supporting, and expanding quality casa programs throughout the state of michigan to ensure…

Civil Rights

Miracles for Kids Inc

Miracles for kids helps families with critically-ill children battle bankruptcy, homelessness, hunger and depression so they can focus on fighting for their child's life.

Recreation & Sports

The Youth Connection Inc

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.

Youth Development

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Canton Community Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Vista Maria. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 21 years old; the field is 13. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 25% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 15% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/69

the rest of the field

15%

2,491/16,539

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.

06the grantee network

59 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

58/59

Grantees still filing

45/59

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$1,313,336Human Services$401,412Youth Development$165,150Health$92,280Recreation & Sports$85,231Education$83,156Philanthropy$81,526

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.

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.

Canton Community Foundation IncMI86.5× affinity38 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Canton Community Foundation Inc · Community Foundation for Southeast · United Way for Southeastern Michigan · Dte Energy Foundation · Children's Hospital of Michigan · The Barton Malow Foundation · Phillip and Elizabeth Filmer Memorial · The Carls Foundation · Michigan Health Endowment Fund · The Jewish Fund · Ford Motor Company Fund · Helen L Kay Charitable Trust

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 organisation EAGLES FOR CHILDREN 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

0get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: THE EMILY ANN GRIFFIN FOUNDATION.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

medium risk

~3 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 7 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

7 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 320005684 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on THE EMILY ANN GRIFFIN FOUNDATION, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

WatchFinancial stability— Roughly 3 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 30% of their budget — diversified.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Eagles for Children?

Find your warmest path to Eagles for Children through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

EAGLES FOR CHILDREN

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

59 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Eagles for Children?

More from the funding graph

EAGLES FOR CHILDREN

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

59 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Eagles for Children?

More from the funding graph