· Private foundation
Joseph and Karen Krantz Family Charitable Trust
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 92% of JOSEPH AND KAREN KRANTZ FAMILY CHARITABLE TRUST’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k6 grants · $20k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $86k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $150k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MEDICINE | $100,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN ENDOWMENT | $50,000 |
| MICHIGAN MEDICINE PATIENT EXP | $21,430 |
| UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MARCHING BAND | $20,000 |
| OUR LADY OF PEACE ST VINCENT DE PAUL | $20,000 |
| SVSU FOUNDATION | $15,000 |
| BRIAN'S HOUSE | $10,000 |
| HARBOR SPRINGS PUBLIC SCHOOLS | $5,000 |
| HUMANE SOCIETY OF HURON VALLEY | $5,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| NATE AND MARY IDA DOAN SANTA HOUSE | $3,050 |
| ELE'S PLACE | $1,000 |
| GREAT LAKES DREAM CENTER | $640 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY17–23, $23k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 83% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +47% since the first grant, against +26% for the ones you funded once.
21 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2025, 13 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $29k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- UOUNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MEDICINE6× · 2019–2025 · $310k
- CMCENTRAL MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY6× · 2017–2024 · $190k
- UOUniversity of Michigan2× · 2021–2022 · $124k · revenue +96% · 37% of their budget
Funded once
- ROREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGANone grant, 2018 · $40k
- CCCAN COUNCIL BAY COUNTYone grant, 2023 · $20k
- RSRACHEL SOVEREIGN MEMORIAL HOMEgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $18k · revenue +102%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Humane society of southwestern michigan exists to provide shelter and care for sick, homeless and unwanted animals. in addition, the organization provides adoption services for the animals in its care.
To promote a violence free atmosphere from domestic and sexual violence in which survivors can recognize their options to have the opportunity to continue living violence free and regain their sense of self-worth; to educate and raise…
To shelter and find forever homes for homeless dogs and cats.
Lighthouse mi endeavors to build equitable communities and alleviate poverty in partnership with and in service to individuals, families, and organizations.
The Betterment of the lives of stray, owned and abandoned companion animals in Saginaw County, MI. Our county has over 20,000 households living below the federal poverty guidelines that own at least one pet. We are their safety net. We…
Our mission is to provide an adoption-friendly animal shelter that will unify the community toward a common goal of responsible animal treatment and increased animal adoptions to design and incorporate new education and public programs…
Provide care for homeless/abused animals
The mission of gw homeless services of northern michigan, inc is to provide safe, supportive shelter to individuals experiencing homelessness.the 2023 990 was for 10/1-12/31/23 due to an accounting period change.
Animal shelter - provide a safe haven for animals without homes.
Our mission is to increase awareness of the problems of people who are homeless and the development and carrying out of strategies to create permanent solutions to homelessness in our community.
To improve and save lives through compassionate care, community engagement and advocacy for animals.
To eliminate sub-standard housing and homelessness from lapeer county.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Council On Domestic Violence & Sexual Assault and the most unlike its peers is Bay Veterans Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
13 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 13 of the 49 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds University of Michigan ↗
- Who funds Food Bank of Eastern Michigan ↗
- Who funds RACHEL SOVEREIGN MEMORIAL HOME ↗
- Who funds BAY VETERANS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HUMANE SOCIETY OF HURON VALLEY ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY ACTION NETWORK ↗
- Who funds HIDDEN HARVEST ↗
- Who funds Rescue Ministries of Mid-Michigan ↗
- Who funds COUNCIL ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE & SEXUAL ASSAULT ↗
- Who funds NATE AND MARY IDA DOAN SANTA HOUSE ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Consumers Energy Foundation · Gougeon Employees Foundation · Bay Area Community Foundation · Nickless Family Charitable Foundation · Wallace & Irene Bronner Family Charitable Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Joseph and Karen Krantz Family Charitable Trust funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Joseph and Karen Krantz Family Charitable Trust?
Find your warmest path to Joseph and Karen Krantz Family 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.