Skip to content
Edward and Elyse Rogers Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Edward and Elyse Rogers Family Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$62k
Granted FY2024still arriving
16
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$16k
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.

Environment$117kScience & Tech$83kPhilanthropy$52kPublic Benefit$36kArts & Culture$17kHealth$15kEducation$13kHuman Services$8kOther$0
02FY2024 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k14 grants · $37k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $26k
$3,500
Median grant
6
States reached
$1.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MOTE MARINE LABORATORY$15,500
GRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CPNSERVANCY$10,000
INTERNATIONAL DARK SKY DICSCOVERY$5,500
MACKINAW CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY$5,000
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY OF FLORIDA$5,000
LITTLE FORKS CONSERVANCY$5,000
MIDLAND CENTER FOR THE ARTS$5,000
ELK-SKEGEMOG LAKE ASSOCIATION$3,500
MIDLAND AREA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$3,000
LAND CONSERVANCY OF WEST MICHIGAN$1,500
COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF SARASOTA$1,000
FULBRIGHT ASSOCIATION$500
WORLD MONUMENT FUND$500
SAMHATI$500
OCEAN CONSERVANCY-GUARDIAN OF THE SEAS$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 (FY17–21, $13k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 15% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%WEST MIDLAND FAMILY CENTER: $2k → 19%TIDEWELL HOSPICE: $6k → 9%TIDEWELL HOSPICE: $5k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

MI
NY
NV
OH
CA
VA
AZ
DC
FL
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.

82%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$269k · 24 repeat orgs$59k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +72% since the first grant, against +18% for those funded once.

24 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2024, 13 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

24
26

Total granted

$269k
$52k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+72%
+18%

Still filing today

71%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8k 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
EnvironmentAnimalsArts & CultureHuman ServicesRecreation & SportsPublic BenefitOther
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

  • MOTE MARINE LABORATORY INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $77k · revenue +274%
  • MC
    MACKINAC CENTER
    4× · 2017–2020 · $16k · revenue +64%
  • GT
    GRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY
    2× · 2022–2024 · $15k · revenue +132%

Funded once

  • GT
    GRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL CONSERVANCY
    one grant, 2023 · $10k
  • TN
    THE NATURE CONSERVANCY IN MICHIGAN
    one grant, 2021 · $5k
  • MC
    MACKINAW CENTRER FOR PUBLIC POLICY
    one grant, 2022 · $5k
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
Huron Pines Resource Conservation & Development Council Inc

It is our mission at huron pines to conserve and enhance northern michigan's natural resources to ensure healthy water, protected places and vibrant communities. for alomst 50 years, our work across the forests, lakes and streams of…

Environment
2
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
3
Coalition to Protect Michigan Resources

The coalition to protect michigan resources's mission is to be a strong voice for the equitable co-management of michigan's fisheries, with both the great lakes and inland lakes and streams, to insure that conservation principles remain in…

Environment
4
Wildcoast

The mission of wildcoast is to conserve coastal and marine ecosystems and address climate change through natural solutions. our staff is dedicated to conserving threatened and endangered coastlines and wildlife in california and mexico.…

Environment
5
Midcoast Conservancy

The mission of Midcoast Conservancy is to protect vital lands and waters on a scale that matters and to inspire wonder and action on behalf of all species and the Earth.

Environment
6
Southeast Michigan Land Conservancy

To conserve natural land and open space - including forests, wetlands, meadows, agricultural lands, and places of scenic beauty - to provide habitat for wildlife and to enrich the lives of people.

Environment
7
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
8
The Quebec-Labrador Foundation Inc

The program mission of the quebec-labrador foundation u.s. is defined by a regional component (new england and eastern canada), and an international component, which ties our regional model to a global conservation network. qlf's program…

Philanthropy
9
West Creek Conservancy

Our mission is to enrich the lives of all people in northeast ohio by conserving natural habitats, restoring the ecological value of our region's lands and waters, and expanding opportunities to connect people from all cultures to…

Environment
10
Wildlands Trust Inc

The wildlands trust works throughout southeastern massachusetts to conserve and permanently protect native habitats, farmland, and lands of high ecologic and scenic value that serve to keep our communities healthy and our residents…

Environment
11
Conservation Minnesota

Conservation minnesota's mission is to turn our shared conservation values into state priorities and provide you with the information you need to make decisions for your family, community and future.

Environment
12
Natural Resources Foundation of

To protect wisconsin's lands, waters, and wildlife by providing funding, leading partnerships, and connecting all people with nature.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Park Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Samhati. 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

32 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. 32 of the 56 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)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
32/32
Grantees still filing
22/32
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MOTE MARINE LABORATORY INC: $77,000 · OtherMOTE MARINE LABORATORY INCTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY OF FLORIDA: $30,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY OF FLORIDAGRAND TRAVERSE LAND CONSERVANCY: $16,000 · OtherGRAND TRAVERSE LAND CONSERVANCYELK-SKEGEMOG LAKES ASSOCIATION: $16,000 · OtherELK-SKEGEMOG LAKES ASSOCIATIONMACKINAW CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY: $15,000 · OtherMACKINAW CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICYUnited Way of Midland County: $12,500 · OtherGRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL CONSERVANCY: $10,000 · OtherUNITED WAY OF SARASOTA: $10,000 · Other+32 more: $61,600 · Other+32 moreGRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY: $15,000 · EnvironmentGRAND TRA…The Little Forks Conservancy Inc: $7,200 · EnvironmentThe Littl…SOUTHERN NEVADA CONSERVANCY: $1,500 · EnvironmentLand Conservancy of West Michigan: $1,500 · EnvironmentThe Marie Selby Botanical Gardens Inc: $1,500 · EnvironmentTIP OF THE MITT WATERSHED COUNCIL: $1,100 · Environment+1 more: $800 · EnvironmentTHE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF SARASOTA CO INC: $22,750 · PhilanthropyMIDLAND AREA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $3,000 · PhilanthropyUNITED WAY SUNCOAST INC: $2,000 · PhilanthropyMACKINAC CENTER: $16,000 · Public BenefitTIDEWELL HOSPICE INC: $11,000 · Human ServicesWEST MIDLAND FAMILY CENTER: $4,600 · Human ServicesMidland Center for the Arts Inc: $11,400 · Arts & CultureWORLD MONUMENTS FUND INC: $500 · Arts & CultureNorthwood University: $9,000 · Education
Other$248,100Environment$28,600Philanthropy$27,750Public Benefit$16,000Human Services$15,600Arts & Culture$11,900Education$9,000

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 budgetMOTE MARINE LABORATORY INC: $77,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetTHE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF SARASOTA CO INC: $22,750 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetMACKINAC CENTER: $16,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetELK-SKEGEMOG LAKES ASSOCIATION: $16,000 over 7y, 1.5% of budgetGRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY: $15,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetUnited Way of Midland County: $12,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetMidland Center for the Arts Inc: $11,400 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTIDEWELL HOSPICE INC: $11,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNorthwood University: $9,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetThe Little Forks Conservancy Inc: $7,200 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetWEST MIDLAND FAMILY CENTER: $4,600 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetSAMHATI: $4,000 over 8y, 0.7% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $3,200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPLYMOUTH HARBOR INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSAVE OUR SEABIRDS INC: $3,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetMIDLAND AREA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGLOBAL HERITAGE FUND: $3,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetUNITED WAY SUNCOAST INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSOUTHERN NEVADA CONSERVANCY: $1,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGRAND RAPIDS WHITEWATER INC: $1,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetLand Conservancy of West Michigan: $1,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetThe Marie Selby Botanical Gardens Inc: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTIP OF THE MITT WATERSHED COUNCIL: $1,100 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetFULBRIGHT ASSOCIATION INC: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetOCEAN CONSERVANCY: $800 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSalt River Wild Horse Management Group Inc: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN - SIERRAS: $500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetWORLD MONUMENTS FUND INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGREATER MIDLAND COMMUNITY CTRS INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSOUTHWEST WILDLIFE CONSERVATION CENTER: $250 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEagle Village Inc: $200 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.

  • Who funds MOTE MARINE LABORATORY INC ↗
  • Who funds THE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF SARASOTA CO INC ↗
  • Who funds MACKINAC CENTER ↗
  • Who funds ELK-SKEGEMOG LAKES ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds GRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds United Way of Midland County ↗
  • Who funds Midland Center for the Arts Inc ↗
  • Who funds TIDEWELL HOSPICE INC ↗
  • Who funds Northwood University ↗
  • Who funds The Little Forks Conservancy Inc ↗
  • Who funds WEST MIDLAND FAMILY CENTER ↗
  • Who funds SAMHATI ↗
  • Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds PLYMOUTH HARBOR INC ↗
  • Who funds SAVE OUR SEABIRDS INC ↗
  • Who funds MIDLAND AREA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds GLOBAL HERITAGE FUND ↗
  • Who funds UNITED WAY SUNCOAST INC ↗
  • Who funds SOUTHERN NEVADA CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds GRAND RAPIDS WHITEWATER INC ↗
  • Who funds Land Conservancy of West Michigan ↗
  • Who funds The Marie Selby Botanical Gardens Inc ↗
  • Who funds TIP OF THE MITT WATERSHED COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds FULBRIGHT ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds OCEAN CONSERVANCY ↗

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 Patricia and Davi…Harry a and Margaret …The Doan Family Found…Rollin M Gerstacker F…Midland Area Communit…The Charles J Strosac…The Herbert H & Grace…The Ludington Family …Bill and Linda Stavro…Alden and Vada Dow Fu…Bierlein Companies Fo…Consumers Energy Foun…
The Patricia and David Kepler FoundationDE22.1× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Patricia and David Kepler Foundation · Harry a and Margaret D Towsley Foundation · The Doan Family Foundation · Rollin M Gerstacker Foundation · Midland Area Community Foundation · The Charles J Strosacker Foundation · The Herbert H & Grace a Dow Foundation · The Ludington Family Foundation · Bill and Linda Stavropoulos Family Foundation · Alden and Vada Dow Fund · Bierlein Companies Foundation · Consumers Energy 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 Edward and Elyse Rogers Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Edward and Elyse Rogers Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Mote Marine Laboratory Inc: 4% of income from government
  • United Way Suncoast Inc: 1% of income from government
  • The Marie Selby Botanical Gardens Inc: 0% of income from government
  • Tidewell Hospice Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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 Edward and Elyse Rogers Family Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Edward and Elyse Rogers Family 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 56 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 Edward and Elyse Rogers Family’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