Skip to content
George M and Jo Elyn Nyman Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

George M and Jo Elyn Nyman Charitable Trust

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.

$325k
Granted FY2024still arriving
30
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$150k
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, FY2018 to 2024.

Health$413kArts & Culture$362kFood & Nutrition$244kCivil Rights$128kPhilanthropy$100kCommunity Improvement$57kReligion$57kHuman Services$47kOther$0
02FY2024 · 30 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k24 grants · $66k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $109k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $150k
$2,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN$150,000
JEWISH FED OF METRO DETROIT$42,000
DETROIT INSTITUTE OF ART$27,150
ACLU FUND OF MICHIGAN$15,000
DETROIT SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA$15,000
HEBREW FREE LOAN$10,000
DETROIT PUBLIC TELEVISION$5,000
HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL CENTER (ZEKELMAN)$5,000
JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES$5,000
ORCHARDS CHILDRENS SERVICES$5,000
MICHIGAN RADIO 909 WRCJ$5,000
DETROIT RIVERFRONT CONSERVANCY$5,000
MICHIGAN OPERA THEATER$5,000
JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER$2,500
TUCSON MUSEUM OF ART$2,500
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 (FY18–24, $22k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 14%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $5k → 8%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $3k → 8%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $2k → 8%ORCHARDS CHILDRENS SERVICES: $5k → 8%ORCHARDS CHILDREN'S SERVICES: $3k → 8%ORCHARDS CHILDRENS SERVICES: $2k → 8%ORCHARDS CHILDRENS SERVICES: $1k → 8%LIGHTHOUSE OF OAKLAND COUNTY: $1k → 8%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.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.3M · 33 repeat orgs$205k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +43% since the first grant, against +19% for those funded once.

33 repeat relationships: 22 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

33
33

Total granted

$1.3M
$188k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+43%
+19%

Still filing today

64%
36%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $17k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Arts & CultureHuman ServicesHealthEducationCrime & LegalEnvironmentOther
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

  • UO
    University of Michigan
    3× · 2019–2024 · $301k · revenue +140% · 45% of their budget
  • THE DETROIT INSTITUTE OF ARTS
    7× · 2018–2024 · $194k · revenue +34%
  • HF
    HEBREW FREE LOAN ASSOCIATION
    5× · 2018–2024 · $80k · revenue +1%

Funded once

  • TI
    TEMPLE ISRAEL OF DETROIT
    one grant, 2019 · $50k
  • UC
    URBAN COMMUNICATIONS GROUP
    one grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue -23%
  • PP
    PLANNED PARENTHOOD
    one grant, 2018 · $20k
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
Detroit Historical Society

The Detroit Historical Society tells Detroit's stories and why they matter through its exhibits, programs, outreach, and the preservation and dissemination of its artifacts and collections.

Arts & Culture
2
Hillel of Metropolitan Detroit

Inspire students to be active in jewish life.

Education
3
Detroit Food Policy Council

The organization was founded by a group of concerned citizens, working in cooperation with the detroit city council, to shape food policy and to work for a more localized, more just, and environmentally friendly food system. the…

Food & Nutrition
4
Jewish Historical Society of Michigan

Jewish historical society of michigan shares and celebrates the experiences and contributions of the jewish people, communities and institutions of michigan.

—
5
Michigan Enviromental Council

Informing and educating the public and decision makers about environmental issues.

Environment
6
The Michigan Glass Project
Public Benefit
7
The Jewish Fund

The jewish fund is organized and operates exclusively for charitable, educational, and religious purposes. the fund's primary activities are: supporting a jewish health care mission in the greater detroit area and michigan; promotion of…

Philanthropy
8
About Face Detroit
—
9
Detroit Jews for Justice

Djj advances racial and economic justice by developing metro detroit jews as community organizers who fight for transformative policy change in deep partnership with neighbors

Civil Rights
10
Detroiters Working for Environmental Justice

The organization is known as the leader in the movement and is seen as the "go to" experts on environmental justice and sustainable redevelopment because of its knowledge and its network.

Health
11
Jewish Federation of Detroit

The jewish federation of detroit is the cornerstone of our jewish community. we are committed to taking care of the needs of the jewish people and building a strong and vibrant jewish future, in detroit, in israel and around the world.

Philanthropy
12
The Jewish Museum

The mission of the jewish museum is to collect, preserve, exhibit and interpret art and jewish culture. see schedule o for more information.

Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Family Service; the most unlike its peers is Wildlife Conservation Society. 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

37 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. 37 of the 74 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
37/37
Grantees still filing
32/37
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

University of Michigan: $300,500 · OtherUniversity of MichiganJEWISH FED OF METRO DETROIT: $214,000 · OtherJEWISH FED OF METRO DETROITACLU FUND OF MICHIGAN: $105,000 · OtherACLU FUND OF MICHIGANTEMPLE ISRAEL OF DETROIT: $50,000 · OtherJCC OF METRO DETROIT: $47,000 · Other+50 more: $244,750 · Other+50 moreTHE DETROIT INSTITUTE OF ARTS: $193,750 · Arts & CultureTHE DETROIT INSTITUTE…DETROIT SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA INC: $36,500 · Arts & CultureDETROIT SYMPHONY ORCH…DETROIT OPERA: $19,500 · Arts & CultureDETROIT OPERADETROIT PUBLIC MEDIA: $13,500 · Arts & CultureTUCSON MUSEUM OF ART AND HISTORIC BLOCK INC: $11,750 · Arts & Culture+2 more: $10,300 · Arts & CulturePROJECT HEALTHY COMMUNITY: $75,000 · HealthDetroit Rescue Mission Ministries: $8,000 · Health+1 more: $1,000 · HealthHEBREW FREE LOAN ASSOCIATION: $80,000 · PhilanthropyORCHARDS CHILDREN'S SERVICES INC: $11,000 · Human ServicesJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $9,500 · Human ServicesSANCTUM HOUSE INC: $3,000 · Human ServicesLIGHTHOUSE OF OAKLAND COUNTY: $1,000 · Human ServicesDETROIT CRIME COMMISSION: $20,000 · Crime & LegalSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $3,000 · Crime & LegalFORGOTTEN HARVEST INC: $13,000 · Food & NutritionMetro Food Rescue: $1,000 · Food & Nutrition
Other$961,250Arts & Culture$285,300Health$84,000Philanthropy$80,000Human Services$24,500Crime & Legal$23,000Food & Nutrition$14,000

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 budgetUniversity of Michigan: $300,500 over 3y, 45% of budgetTHE DETROIT INSTITUTE OF ARTS: $193,750 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetHEBREW FREE LOAN ASSOCIATION: $80,000 over 5y, 1.8% of budgetPROJECT HEALTHY COMMUNITY: $75,000 over 3y, 8.9% of budgetDETROIT SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA INC: $36,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetURBAN COMMUNICATIONS GROUP: $25,000 over 1y, 7.6% of budgetDETROIT CRIME COMMISSION: $20,000 over 3y, 1.8% of budgetDETROIT OPERA: $19,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetDETROIT PUBLIC MEDIA: $13,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetFORGOTTEN HARVEST INC: $13,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetTUCSON MUSEUM OF ART AND HISTORIC BLOCK INC: $11,750 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetORCHARDS CHILDREN'S SERVICES INC: $11,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $9,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetHOLOCAUST MEMORIAL CENTER INC: $9,300 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetGESHER HUMAN SERVICES: $8,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetDETROIT RIVERFRONT CONSERVANCY INC: $8,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetDetroit Rescue Mission Ministries: $8,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetYAD EZRA: $4,500 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTHE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $4,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetWildlife Conservation Society: $3,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSANCTUM HOUSE INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetUniversity of Miami: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHILLEL DAY SCHOOL OF METRO DETROIT: $3,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $3,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetALTERNATIVES FOR GIRLS: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH HOSPICE & CHAPLAINCY NETWORK: $1,800 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEAN AND SAMUEL FRANKEL JEWISH ACADEMY OF METROPOLITAN DETROIT: $1,800 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFAR CONSERVATORY OF THERAPEUTIC AND PERFORMING ARTS: $1,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN MICHIG: $1,200 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSKY FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetLittle Traverse Conservancy Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGILDA'S CLUB METRO DETROIT: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMetro Food Rescue: $1,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSOUTH OAKLAND SHELTER: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCONGREGATION B'NAI B'RITH HILLEL: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE GREENING OF DETROIT: $500 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 University of Michigan ↗
  • Who funds THE DETROIT INSTITUTE OF ARTS ↗
  • Who funds HEBREW FREE LOAN ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT HEALTHY COMMUNITY ↗
  • Who funds DETROIT SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA INC ↗
  • Who funds URBAN COMMUNICATIONS GROUP ↗
  • Who funds DETROIT CRIME COMMISSION ↗
  • Who funds DETROIT OPERA ↗
  • Who funds DETROIT PUBLIC MEDIA ↗
  • Who funds FORGOTTEN HARVEST INC ↗
  • Who funds TUCSON MUSEUM OF ART AND HISTORIC BLOCK INC ↗
  • Who funds ORCHARDS CHILDREN'S SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE ↗
  • Who funds HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds GESHER HUMAN SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds DETROIT RIVERFRONT CONSERVANCY INC ↗
  • Who funds Detroit Rescue Mission Ministries ↗
  • Who funds YAD EZRA ↗
  • Who funds THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ↗
  • Who funds Wildlife Conservation Society ↗

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.

Marjorie and Maxwell …Marvin and Betty Dant…Harold and Penny B Bl…Edward C and Linda Dr…The Kresge FoundationThe Samuel & Jean Fra…The Andrea and Lawren…The Ravitz FoundationThe Eugene Applebaum …United Jewish Foundat…Community Foundation …Robt & Gail Katz Fami…
Marjorie and Maxwell Jospey FoundationMI32.7× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Marjorie and Maxwell Jospey Foundation · Marvin and Betty Danto Family Foundation · Harold and Penny B Blumenstein Foundation Corporation · Edward C and Linda Dresner Levy Foundation · The Kresge Foundation · The Samuel & Jean Frankel Health and Research Foundation · The Andrea and Lawrence Wolfe Family Foundation · The Ravitz Foundation · The Eugene Applebaum Family Foundation · United Jewish Foundation · Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan · Robt & Gail Katz Family 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 George M and Jo Elyn Nyman Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from George M and Jo Elyn Nyman Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 5%
  • University of Miami: 5% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
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 George M and Jo Elyn Nyman Charitable Trust?

Find your warmest path to George M and Jo Elyn Nyman Charitable Trust 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 74 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 George M and Jo Elyn Nyman’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