Skip to content
James a and Faith Knight Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

James a and Faith Knight Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$811k
Granted FY2025still arriving
41
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$60k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Human Services$1.1MHealth$851kHousing & Shelter$805kYouth Development$790kEducation$665kEnvironment$495kFood & Nutrition$484kCommunity Improvement$355kOther$0
02FY2025 · 41 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $16k
  • $10k–50k36 grants · $680k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $115k
$18,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$14M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FOOD GATHERERS$60,000
WOMEN'S CENTER OF SOUTHEAST MICHIGA$55,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MICHIGAN$45,000
NEUTRAL ZONE$30,000
COMMUNITY ACTION NETWORK$30,000
GIRLS GROUP$25,000
SAFEHOUSE CENTER$25,000
Individual grant recipient$25,000
AVALON HOUSING INC$25,000
YPSILANTI MEALS ON WHEELS$25,000
NONPROFIT NETWORK$25,000
EMERSON SCHOOL$25,000
WASHTENAW AREA COUNCIL FOR CHILDREN$25,000
HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF HURON VALLE$25,000
BIRD CENTER OF WASHTENAW COUNTY$20,000
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 (FY17–25, $1.2M) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%NONPROFIT NETWORK: $30k → 13%NONPROFIT NETWORK: $30k → 13%NONPROFIT NETWORK: $25k → 13%NONPROFIT NETWORK: $25k → 13%NONPROFIT NETWORK: $25k → 13%NONPROFIT NETWORK: $20k → 13%NONPROFIT NETWORK: $25k → 13%NONPROFIT NETWORK: $25k → 13%NONPROFIT NETWORK: $25k → 13%HANDS ACROSS THE WATER: $10k → 13%FAITH IN ACTION: $10k → 14%SOS COMMUNITY SERVICES: $30k → 14%SOS COMMUNITY SERVICES: $25k → 14%OZONE HOUSE INC: $25k → 14%WOMEN'S CENTER OF SOUTHEAST MICHIGA: $42k → 14%PEACE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER: $40k → 14%WOMEN'S CENTER OF SOUTHEAST MICHIGA: $40k → 14%PEACE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER: $30k → 14%PEACE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER: $30k → 14%ARBOR HOSPICE: $25k → 14%APPLE PLAYSCHOOLS: $20k → 14%APPLE PLAYSCHOOLS: $20k → 14%APPLE PLAYSCHOOLS: $15k → 14%ARBOR HOSPICE: $15k → 14%ARBOR HOSPICE: $10k → 14%APPLE PLAYSCHOOLS: $10k → 14%OZONE HOUSE: $50k → 14%OZONE HOUSE: $50k → 14%OZONE HOUSE: $50k → 14%WOMEN'S CENTER OF SOUTHEAST MICHIGA: $57k → 14%WOMEN'S CENTER OF SOUTHEAST MICHIGA: $56k → 14%WOMEN'S CENTER OF SOUTHEAST MICHIGA: $55k → 14%WOMEN'S CENTER OF SOUTHEAST MICHIGA: $55k → 14%WOMEN'S CENTER OF SOUTHEAST MICHIGA: $50k → 14%MICHIGAN ABILITY PARTNERS: $30k → 14%CHILDRENS LITERACY NETWORK: $18k → 14%MICHIGAN ABILITY PARTNERS: $15k → 14%MICHIGAN ABILITY PARTNERS: $15k → 14%CHILDREN'S LITERACY NETWORK: $16k → 14%CHILDREN'S LITERACY NETWORK: $15k → 14%CHILDREN'S LITERACY NETWORK: $13k → 14%CHILDREN'S LITERACY NETWORK: $12k → 14%CHILDREN'S LITERACY NETWORK: $10k → 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.
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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$6.3M · 55 repeat orgs$952k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +44% since the first grant, against +27% for those funded once.

55 repeat relationships: 33 still active in FY2025, 22 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

55
41

Total granted

$6.3M
$876k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+44%
+27%

Still filing today

78%
39%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $76k 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
Human ServicesEnvironmentHealthYouth DevelopmentArts & CultureHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • TW
    THE WOMEN'S CENTER OF SOUTHEASTERN MICHIGAN
    7× · 2019–2025 · $355k · revenue +97%
  • PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MICHIGAN
    8× · 2018–2025 · $335k · revenue +44%
  • FG
    FOOD GATHERERS
    7× · 2017–2025 · $290k · revenue +73%

Funded once

  • UW
    UNITED WAY OF WASHTENAW COUNTY
    one grant, 2020 · $50k · revenue -92%
  • YD
    YPSILANTI DISTRICT LIBRARY
    one grant, 2022 · $50k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $40k
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
Land Conservancy of West Michigan

Our mission is conserving West Michigans ecologically critical land. We protect land by creating public nature preserves, providing support to communities and local governments in creating natural areas, and helping private landowners…

Environment
2
Catholic Social Services of Washtenaw County

Catholic Social Services of Washtenaw County D/B/A Catholic Charities Washtenaw County provides diverse, holistic social services including adoption and pregnancy counseling, food and basic needs assistance, domestic and child abuse…

—
3
Ann Arbor Community Center Inc

With an emphasis on socio-economically disadvantaged youth and families, the Ann Arbor Community Center, Inc. (AACC) is a vital community resource that provides high quality programs, information and services to citizens in need.

—
4
Michigan Enviromental Council

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

Environment
5
Michigan Anti-Cruelty Society

To maintain and operate a hospital, ambulance and veterinary services for the care of animals. the maintenance and operation of kennels and suitable chambers for the humane destruction of wounded animals.

Animals
6
Area Agency On Aging of Western Michigan Inc

Through internal expertise, external partnerships, and advocacy, the area agency on aging of western michigan provides older adults, adults with disabilities, and their caregivers equitable access to services that promote independence and…

Human Services
7
Michigan Advocacy Program

To advance the safety, independence, and economic stability of those most affected by poverty, racism, and other structurally oppressive systems by increasing access to justice and working for systemic solutions.

Crime & Legal
8
Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition

Works to end environmental injustice by empowering communities at the grassroots level.the corporation is organzied exclusively for charitable, religious, educational and scientific purposes, including for such purposes, the makeing of…

Environment
9
Lakeshore Legal Aid

Standing with our neighbors, Lakeshore Legal Aid fights poverty and injustice through advocacy and by providing meaningful and dignified access to the legal system.

Crime & Legal
10
Lincoln Behavioral Services

To provide comprehensive outpatient mental health services to over 5400 individuals and their families in a consumer driven person centered delivery system. Approximately 15% of our staff members are our clients who are involved in a…

Health
11
United Way of Marquette County

Focusing community resources to meet community needs the United Way of Marquette County works to advance the common good by connecting people with health and human care issues they are concerned about and to provide the oversight the…

—
12
Recycle Ann Arbor

To develop and operate innovative reuse, recycling, and zero-waste programs that improve the environmental quality of our community.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ozone House Inc; the most unlike its peers is Saline High School Prep Hockey Team. 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

64 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 64 of the 105 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)
24
Early backer (in before they grew)
64/64
Grantees still filing
44/64
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FOOD GATHERERS: $290,000 · OtherFOOD GATHERERSFriends In Deed: $213,000 · OtherFriends In DeedBIRD CENTER OF MICHIGAN INC: $194,000 · OtherBIRD CENTER OF MICHIGAN INC826 MICHIGAN INC: $165,000 · OtherSAFEHOUSE CENTER: $160,000 · OtherYPSILANTI MEALS ON WHEELS: $154,145 · OtherWASHTENAW AREA COUNCIL FOR CHILDREN: $135,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $135,000 · OtherFOUNDATIONS PRESCHOOL OF ANN ARBOR: $125,000 · Other+62 more: $2,012,539 · Other+62 moreTHE WOMEN'S CENTER OF SOUTHEASTERN MICHIGAN: $355,340 · Human ServicesTHE WOMEN'S CENTER OF…NONPROFIT NETWORK: $230,000 · Human ServicesNONPROFIT NETWORKCOMMUNITY ACTION NETWORK: $180,000 · Human ServicesCOMMUNITY ACTION NETW…OZONE HOUSE INC: $175,000 · Human ServicesOZONE HOUSE INCPeace Neighborhood Center: $100,000 · Human ServicesPeace Neighborhood Ce…CHILDRENS LITERACY NETWORK: $81,950 · Human ServicesCHILDRENS LITERACY NE…APPLE PLAYSCHOOLS: $65,000 · Human ServicesMICHIGAN ABILITY PARTNERS: $60,000 · Human ServicesSOS COMMUNITY SERVICES: $55,000 · Human ServicesArbor Hospice Inc: $50,000 · Human Services+2 more: $20,000 · Human ServicesELE'S PLACE INC: $265,000 · Youth DevelopmentELE'S PLACE …GIRLS GROUP: $205,000 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS GROUPNeutral Zone: $190,000 · Youth DevelopmentNeutral ZoneGROWING HOPE INC: $145,000 · Youth DevelopmentGROWING HOPE…+1 more: $20,000 · Youth DevelopmentPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MICHIGAN: $335,000 · HealthActive Against ALS: $87,380 · HealthCHILDREN'S HEALING CENTER: $65,000 · HealthPackard Health Inc: $25,000 · Health+1 more: $15,000 · HealthHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF HURON VALLEY: $265,000 · Housing & ShelterSHELTER ASSOCIATION OF WASHTENAW COUNTY: $220,000 · Housing & ShelterWASHTENAW HOUSING ALLIANCE: $25,000 · Housing & ShelterSOUTHEAST MICHIGAN LAND CONSERVANCY: $135,000 · EnvironmentTHE TREELINE CONSERVANCY: $75,000 · EnvironmentLEGACY LAND CONSERVANCY: $70,000 · EnvironmentThe Stewardship Network: $65,000 · EnvironmentECOLOGY CENTER: $40,000 · EnvironmentMICHIGAN LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $25,000 · EnvironmentAnn Arbor Art Association: $85,000 · Arts & CultureMICHIGAN THEATER FOUNDATION INC: $30,000 · Arts & CultureAnn Arbor Summer Festival Inc: $15,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$3,583,684Human Services$1,372,290Youth Development$825,000Health$527,380Housing & Shelter$510,000Environment$410,000Arts & Culture$130,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE WOMEN'S CENTER OF SOUTHEASTERN MICHIGAN: $355,340 over 7y, 4.1% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MICHIGAN: $335,000 over 8y, 0.3% of budgetFOOD GATHERERS: $290,000 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF HURON VALLEY: $265,000 over 9y, 0.6% of budgetELE'S PLACE INC: $265,000 over 7y, 1.7% of budgetNONPROFIT NETWORK: $230,000 over 9y, 6.3% of budgetSHELTER ASSOCIATION OF WASHTENAW COUNTY: $220,000 over 6y, 1.7% of budgetFriends In Deed: $213,000 over 8y, 8.0% of budgetGIRLS GROUP: $205,000 over 8y, 3.5% of budgetBIRD CENTER OF MICHIGAN INC: $194,000 over 9y, 11% of budgetNeutral Zone: $190,000 over 7y, 3.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY ACTION NETWORK: $180,000 over 6y, 2.8% of budgetOZONE HOUSE INC: $175,000 over 4y, 1.8% of budget826 MICHIGAN INC: $165,000 over 7y, 5.3% of budgetYPSILANTI MEALS ON WHEELS: $154,145 over 6y, 1.5% of budgetGROWING HOPE INC: $145,000 over 5y, 3.9% of budgetWASHTENAW AREA COUNCIL FOR CHILDREN: $135,000 over 6y, 13% of budgetSOUTHEAST MICHIGAN LAND CONSERVANCY: $135,000 over 9y, 9.7% of budgetANN ARBOR AREA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $106,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetPeace Neighborhood Center: $100,000 over 3y, 5.0% of budgetTherapeutic Riding Inc: $98,000 over 7y, 4.3% of budgetActive Against ALS: $87,380 over 4y, 36% of budgetAnn Arbor Art Association: $85,000 over 4y, 3.3% of budgetCHILDRENS LITERACY NETWORK: $81,950 over 6y, 9.2% of budgetTHE TREELINE CONSERVANCY: $75,000 over 3y, 11% of budgetSTUDENT ADVOCACY CENTER OF MICHIGAN INC: $70,000 over 4y, 1.9% of budgetLEGACY LAND CONSERVANCY: $70,000 over 4y, 1.5% of budgetThe Stewardship Network: $65,000 over 3y, 5.0% of budgetCHILDREN'S HEALING CENTER: $65,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetALLEN CREEK PRESCHOOL: $65,000 over 3y, 11% of budgetAPPLE PLAYSCHOOLS: $65,000 over 4y, 1.4% of budgetMICHIGAN ABILITY PARTNERS: $60,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetSOS COMMUNITY SERVICES: $55,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetArbor Hospice Inc: $50,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetUNITED WAY OF WASHTENAW COUNTY: $50,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetEMERSON SCHOOL INC: $50,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetWILD SWAN THEATER: $45,000 over 2y, 6.6% of budgetECOLOGY CENTER: $40,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetANIMALS AND SOCIETY INSTITUTE INC: $40,000 over 3y, 7.4% of budgetFRIENDS OF RUTHERFORD POOL: $35,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetCORNER HEALTH CENTER: $35,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetWASHTENAW LITERACY: $30,000 over 2y, 3.8% of budgetGRASS LAKE SANCTUARY: $30,000 over 2y, 16% of budgetCOUNCIL FOR THE PREVENTION OF CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT OF JACKSON CNTY: $30,000 over 2y, 17% of budgetST LOUIS CENTER: $30,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF HURON VALLEY: $30,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetMICHIGAN THEATER FOUNDATION INC: $30,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetEDUCATE YOUTH INC: $25,000 over 2y, 13% 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 THE WOMEN'S CENTER OF SOUTHEASTERN MICHIGAN ↗
  • Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MICHIGAN ↗
  • Who funds FOOD GATHERERS ↗
  • Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF HURON VALLEY ↗
  • Who funds ELE'S PLACE INC ↗
  • Who funds NONPROFIT NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds SHELTER ASSOCIATION OF WASHTENAW COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds Friends In Deed ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS GROUP ↗
  • Who funds BIRD CENTER OF MICHIGAN INC ↗
  • Who funds Neutral Zone ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY ACTION NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds OZONE HOUSE INC ↗
  • Who funds 826 MICHIGAN INC ↗
  • Who funds YPSILANTI MEALS ON WHEELS ↗
  • Who funds GROWING HOPE INC ↗
  • Who funds WASHTENAW AREA COUNCIL FOR CHILDREN ↗
  • Who funds SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds ANN ARBOR AREA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Peace Neighborhood Center ↗
  • Who funds Therapeutic Riding Inc ↗
  • Who funds Active Against ALS ↗
  • Who funds Ann Arbor Art Association ↗
  • Who funds CHILDRENS LITERACY NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds THE TREELINE CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds STUDENT ADVOCACY CENTER OF MICHIGAN INC ↗
  • Who funds LEGACY LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds The Stewardship Network ↗
  • Who funds CHILDREN'S HEALING CENTER ↗
  • Who funds ALLEN CREEK PRESCHOOL ↗
  • Who funds APPLE PLAYSCHOOLS ↗
  • Who funds MICHIGAN ABILITY PARTNERS ↗

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.

Ann Arbor Area Commun…Harry a and Margaret …United Way of Washten…The Martin Family Fou…Community Foundation …The Buhr FoundationDuffy FoundationSpeckhard-Knight Char…Edward F Redies Found…DTE Energy FoundationHerrick FoundationKiwanis Club of Ann A…
Ann Arbor Area Community FoundationMI96.6× affinity45 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation · Harry a and Margaret D Towsley Foundation · United Way of Washtenaw County · The Martin Family Foundation · Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan · The Buhr Foundation · Duffy Foundation · Speckhard-Knight Charitable Foundation · Edward F Redies Foundation Inc · DTE Energy Foundation · Herrick Foundation · Kiwanis Club of Ann Arbor Foundation Inc

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 James a and Faith Knight Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from James a and Faith Knight Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%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
    26report 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.

    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 105 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on James a and Faith Knight’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