Skip to content
Interfaith Council for Peace & Justice at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Interfaith Council for Peace & Justice

Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice (ICPJ) empowers our communities, people of faith and congregations, mutual aid groups, network organizations, and individual volunteers, to make radical systemic change with love within Washtenaw County and across Michigan.

$77k
Granted FY2024still arriving
5
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through 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, FY2021 to 2024.

Public Benefit$89kReligion$51kEmployment$18kCrime & Legal$18k
02FY2024 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 5 grants below total $48,142, the rows itemized in this filing. The $76,800 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $28,658 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 · FY2024

  • Under $10k4 grants · $29k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
$7,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$393k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$19,642
We Want Green Too$8,000
Cadillac Urban Gardens$7,000
Urban Core Collective$7,000
The Strategic Coyote LLC$6,500
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 (FY22–22, $20k) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 17%. 50% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 17%One Love Global Inc: $10k → 16%Urban Neighborhoods Initiative: $10k → 21%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 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
Workin Rootz

Our mission is to revitalize and re-engage the community by reconnecting to the Earth through land stewardship, food sovereignty, sustainability, and herbalism.

Environment
2
Dream of Detroit

Dream of Detroit is combining community organizing with strategic housing and land development to build a healthy community and empower a marginalized neighborhood on the Westside of Detroit.

Human Services
3
Summer in the City

Summer in the City strives to improve and expand community service in Metro Detroit. By bringing a diverse group of young people together to invest their energy in Detroit, Summer in the City programs address the immediate needs of city…

Philanthropy
4
Project Grow

Project Grow provides over 400 Ann Arbor area residents with space and know-how, educational events and inspiration to grow their own food.

—
5
Impact100 Detroit Impact100 Metro Detroit

Impact100 Metro Detroit is working to be a leader in collective philanthropy and to build a strong presence in metro Detroit which includes specifically the counties of Macomb, Oakland and Wayne. The members are a group of women who want…

Human Services
6
Impact Oakland Now
Community Improvement
7
Michigan Urban Farming Initiative

To engage members of the Michigan community in urban agriculture

Food & Nutrition
8
Volunteers Improving Neighborhood Environments Inc

The organization is committed to developing a sustainable community food system by bringing together diverse groups of people, with a focus on youth development, to establish community gardens, urban agriculture and community green spaces.…

Religion
9
Urban Community Network

Urban Community Network UCN is a non-profit organization that promotes safe, healthy sustainable communities where youth and their families can thrive.

Human Services
10
Urban Farming

Urban Farming is non-partisan and non-denominational. The Urban Farming mission is to Create an Abundance of Food for All in Our Generation by supporting and encouraging the establishment of organic gardens on unused land and space, while…

Food & Nutrition
11
Black Seeds

prove asset to organic food

Food & Nutrition
12
Detroit Black Community Food Sovereignty Network

DBCFSN works to build self-reliance and food security in Detroits black community by influencing public policy promoting urban agriculture, promoting healthy eating and encouraging youth to pursue careers in food related fields.

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Urban Core Collective; the most unlike its peers is Cadillac Urban Gardens. 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

9 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. 9 of the 14 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
3/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $38,782 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $17,854 · OtherIndividual grant recipientAnn Arbor Friends Meeting: $12,019 · OtherAnn Arbor Friends MeetingMICHIGAN STUDENT POWER ALLIANCE: $10,000 · OtherMICHIGAN STUDENT POWER ALLIANCEThe Strategic Coyote LLC: $6,500 · OtherThe Strategic Coyote LLCAnchoRRa: $11,250 · Community ImprovementAnchoRRaDETROIT CHANGE INITIATIVE: $10,000 · Community ImprovementDETROIT CHANGE INITIATI…GEORGIA STREET COMMUNITY COLLECTIVE INC: $7,500 · Community ImprovementGEORGIA STREET COMMUNIT…URBAN CORE COLLECTIVE: $7,000 · Community ImprovementURBAN CORE COLLECTIVEONE LOVE GLOBAL: $10,000 · Human ServicesONE LOVE GLO…Urban Neighborhood Initiatives Inc: $10,000 · Human ServicesUrban Neighb…WE WANT GREEN TOO: $18,000 · EmploymentWE WANT GRE…ALLIED MEDIA PROJECTS INC: $10,000 · Arts & CultureCADILLAC URBAN GARDENS: $7,000 · Food & Nutrition
Other$85,155Community Improvement$35,750Human Services$20,000Employment$18,000Arts & Culture$10,000Food & Nutrition$7,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWE WANT GREEN TOO: $18,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetAnchoRRa: $11,250 over 1y, 10% of budgetALLIED MEDIA PROJECTS INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDETROIT CHANGE INITIATIVE: $10,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetONE LOVE GLOBAL: $10,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetUrban Neighborhood Initiatives Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetGEORGIA STREET COMMUNITY COLLECTIVE INC: $7,500 over 1y, 6.2% of budgetURBAN CORE COLLECTIVE: $7,000 over 1y, 0.6% 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

The Skillman Foundati…
The Skillman FoundationMI15.6× affinity5 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Skillman 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 Interfaith Council for Peace & Justice funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Interfaith Council for Peace & Justice. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%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
    0get 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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Interfaith Council for Peace & Justice?

    Find your warmest path to Interfaith Council for Peace & Justice 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 14 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $6k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Interfaith Council for Peace & Justice’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