Skip to content

· Public charity

Great Lakes Observing System Regional Association

As a nonprofit IOOS Regional Association, GLOS provides end-to-end data services that support science, policy, management, and industry all around the Great Lakes region.

$2.0M
Granted FY2025still arriving
17
Grants FY2025still arriving
7
States reached
$469k
Largest
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 2025.

Environment$8.7MScience & Tech$2.0MAnimals$615kEducation$374kPublic Safety & Disaster$87kRecreation & Sports$28k
02FY2025 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 17 grants below total $1,964,318, the rows itemized in this filing. The $2,017,608 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $53,290 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.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $9k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $221k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $598k
  • $250k+3 grants · $1.1M
$44,111
Median grant
7
States reached
$875k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
IOOS Association$468,867
Michigan Tech$373,670
Colorado School of Mines$294,308
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee$165,009
Regents of University of Michigan$126,415
Michigan Tech$119,672
Michigan Tech$95,499
Upstate Freshwater Institute$91,480
Michigan Tech$44,111
University of Wisconsin-Green Bay$40,952
Florida Atlantic University$40,000
Michigan Tech$32,474
Michigan Tech$30,661
Michigan Tech$16,577
Regents of University of Minnesota$16,079
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 41% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 13%Upstate Freshwater Institute: $115k → 14%LTBB of Odawa Indians: $84k → 9%SpinDance: $615k → 10%Digital Industry Group LLC (DIG): $203k → 11%Michigan Tech: $374k → 14%Wayne State University: $71k → 21%RPS Group PLC: $566k → 7%Colorado School of Mines: $294k → 7%Lake County Department of Utilities: $62k → 9%City of Defiance: $90k → 11%Heidelberg University: $70k → 12%The Cleveland Water Alliance: $69k → 17%IOOS Association: $469k → 7%Upstate Freshwater Institute: $91k → 14%Regents of University of Michigan: $132k → 14%Michigan Tech: $304k → 14%RPS Group PLC: $373k → 7%Colorado School of Mines: $92k → 7%IOOS Association: $434k → 7%Regents of University of Michigan: $126k → 14%Michigan Tech: $187k → 14%RPS Group PLC: $138k → 7%IOOS Association: $433k → 7%Regents of University of Michigan: $84k → 14%Michigan Tech: $125k → 14%RPS Group PLC: $134k → 7%IOOS Association: $339k → 7%State University of New York ESF: $75k → 14%Regents of University of Michigan: $76k → 14%Michigan Tech: $120k → 14%IOOS Association: $305k → 7%State University of New York ESF: $70k → 14%Regents of University of Michigan: $71k → 14%Michigan Tech: $107k → 14%IOOS Association: $256k → 7%State University of New York ESF: $63k → 14%Michigan Tech: $107k → 14%IOOS Association: $182k → 7%State University of New York ESF: $58k → 14%Michigan Tech: $95k → 14%IOOS Association: $169k → 7%Michigan Tech: $83k → 14%IOOS Association: $110k → 7%Michigan Tech: $78k → 14%Michigan Tech: $78k → 14%Michigan Tech: $78k → 14%Michigan Tech: $77k → 14%Michigan Tech: $68k → 14%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

ME
MN
WI
MI
NY
OH
PA
RI
CO
GA
TX
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 19% of Great Lakes Observing System Regional Association’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 35% of the giving stays in MI; by stated purpose, 42%.

Great Lakes Observing System Regional Associationlessmore 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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$10M · 13 repeat orgs$1.5M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +54% since the first grant, against +22% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
19

Total granted

$10M
$1.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+54%
+22%

Still filing today

38%
42%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationEnvironmentScience & TechRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • IA
    IOOS Association
    9× · 2017–2025 · $2.7M · revenue +360% · 85% of their budget
  • SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY
    5× · 2017–2021 · $289k · revenue +45%
  • UF
    UPSTATE FRESHWATER INSTITUTE INC
    4× · 2021–2025 · $282k · revenue +54%

Funded once

  • S
    SpinDance
    one grant, 2022 · $615k
  • DI
    Digital Industry Group LLC
    one grant, 2022 · $203k
  • CO
    CITY OF DEFIANCE
    one grant, 2022 · $90k
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
University of the Sciences in Philadelphia

University of the sciences prepares students to become leaders, innovators, and skilled practitioners in the sciences, the health professions, and related disciplines. we deliver excellence in teaching, research, and service through a safe…

—
2
Roger Williams University

At Roger Williams University, students are prepared to be thinkers and doers ready to solve challenging problems with innovative solutions. RWU offers robust offerings of undergraduate, graduate and professional programs across eight…

Education
3
Stony Brook Urology University Faculty Practice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
4
Stony Brook Surgical Associates University Faculty Practice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
5
Hudson River Foundation for Science and Environmental Research Inc

The mission of the hudson river foundation is to inspire and inform action through science and engaging people to enhance the hudson river, estuary, and watershed (see schedule o).

Environment
6
Worcester Polytechnic Institute

Wpi transforms lives, turns knowledge into action to confront global challenges, and revolutionizes stem through distinctive and inclusive education, projects and research. (http://www.wpi.edu/about/mission.html)

—
7
Stony Brook Internists University Faculty Practice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
8
Neurology Associates of Stony Brook University Faculty Practice Corp

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
9
Stony Brook Ophthalmology University Faculty Practice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
10
University Corporate Research Park I Inc

To hold title and perform related functions in connection with a research park and innovation center in support of michigan state university research foundation.

—
11
Wilson College

Wilson college empowers students to be confident and critical thinkers, creative visionaries, effective communicators, honorable leaders, and agents of justice.

Education
12
The Water Research Foundation

The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Syracuse University; the most unlike its peers is Ioos Association. 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

13 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. 13 of the 32 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
10/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Michigan Tech University: $2,359,605 · OtherMichigan Tech UniversityUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN: $1,526,660 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSINRPS Group PLC: $1,211,150 · OtherRPS Group PLCSpinDance: $615,230 · OtherSpinDanceRegents of University of Michigan: $569,885 · OtherRegents of University of MichiganCOLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES: $431,647 · OtherCOLORADO SCHOOL OF MINESUNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA: $394,890 · Other+12 more: $905,190 · Other+12 moreIOOS Association: $2,695,918 · EnvironmentIOOS AssociationUPSTATE FRESHWATER INSTITUTE INC: $281,826 · EnvironmentUPSTATE FRESHWATER INSTITUTE I…CLEVELAND WATER ALLIANCE: $146,760 · Environment+2 more: $35,903 · EnvironmentSYRACUSE UNIVERSITY: $288,776 · EducationHeidelberg University: $70,000 · EducationCLARKSON UNIVERSITY: $49,423 · EducationNORTHWESTERN MICHIGAN COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $48,805 · EducationThe Research Foundation for The State University of New York: $33,657 · Education+1 more: $16,357 · EducationFOX-WOLF WATERSHED ALLIANCE INC: $53,162 · Science & TechSALMON UNLIMITED - WISCONSIN INC: $28,391 · Recreation & Sports
Other$8,014,257Environment$3,160,407Education$507,018Science & Tech$53,162Recreation & Sports$28,391

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 budgetIOOS Association: $2,695,918 over 9y, 85% of budgetSYRACUSE UNIVERSITY: $288,776 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetUPSTATE FRESHWATER INSTITUTE INC: $281,826 over 4y, 6.1% of budgetCLEVELAND WATER ALLIANCE: $146,760 over 4y, 12% of budgetHeidelberg University: $70,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFOX-WOLF WATERSHED ALLIANCE INC: $53,162 over 1y, 4.4% of budgetCLARKSON UNIVERSITY: $49,423 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNORTHWESTERN MICHIGAN COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $48,805 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetThe Research Foundation for The State University of New York: $33,657 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSALMON UNLIMITED - WISCONSIN INC: $28,391 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetSUPERIOR WATERSHED PARTNERSHIP: $25,903 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCornell University: $16,357 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetREGIONAL SCIENCE CONSORTIUM AT PRESQUE I: $10,000 over 1y, 1.3% 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 IOOS Association ↗
  • Who funds SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds UPSTATE FRESHWATER INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds CLEVELAND WATER ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds Heidelberg University ↗
  • Who funds FOX-WOLF WATERSHED ALLIANCE INC ↗
  • Who funds CLARKSON UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds NORTHWESTERN MICHIGAN COLLEGE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds The Research Foundation for The State University of New York ↗
  • Who funds SALMON UNLIMITED - WISCONSIN INC ↗
  • Who funds SUPERIOR WATERSHED PARTNERSHIP ↗
  • Who funds Cornell University ↗
  • Who funds REGIONAL SCIENCE CONSORTIUM AT PRESQUE I ↗

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.

National Fish and Wildlife FoundationDC14.5× affinity5 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Folds of Honor Foundation · 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 Great Lakes Observing System Regional Association funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Great Lakes Observing System Regional Association. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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
    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 Great Lakes Observing System Regional Association?

    Find your warmest path to Great Lakes Observing System Regional Association 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 32 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Great Lakes Observing System Regional Association’s filings →

    More from the funding graph