Skip to content

· Private foundation

Joseph G and Helen I Zimmerman Charitable Trust

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.

$1.8M
Granted FY2025still arriving
16
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$1.5M
Largest
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2025.

Education$2.5MAnimals$1.4MArts & Culture$103kHuman Services$35kReligion$10kPhilanthropy$10kEnvironment$5kCivil Rights$5kOther$0
02FY2025 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $25k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $80k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $168k
  • $250k+1 grant · $1.5M
$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$5.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ALMA COLLEGE$1,500,000
ALMA COLLEGE$100,000
CITY OPERA HOUSE$67,662
WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER$10,000
CHERRYLAND HUMANE SOCIETY$10,000
ELK RAPIDS DISTRICT LIBRARY$10,000
OASIS FAMILY RESOURCE CENTER$10,000
TRAVERSE CITY PHILHARMONIC$10,000
LITTLE RASCALS CAT SANCTUARY INC$10,000
CADILLAC ROTARY CHARITIES$10,000
WCMU PUBLIC MEDIA$10,000
TC PAW CAT RESCUE$5,000
VOUGE THEATRE$5,000
VETERANS FOR PEACE CHAPTER 50$5,000
LAKE COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY$5,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY21–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 62% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CITY OPERA HOUSE: $68k → 7%LITTLE TRAVERSE BAY HUMANE SOCIETY: $5k → 9%ELK RAPIDS DISTRICT LIBRARY: $10k → 9%TRAVERSE CITY PHILHARMONIC: $10k → 10%INTERLOCHEN PUBLIC RADIO: $5k → 10%ALMA COLLEGE: $1.5M → 12%OASIS FAMILY RESOURCE CENTER: $10k → 13%LITTLE RASCALS CAT SANCTUARY INC: $10k → 13%WCMU PUBLIC MEDIA: $10k → 19%LAKE COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY: $5k → 23%WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER: $10k → 7%TC PAW CAT RESCUE: $5k → 10%ALMA COLLEGE: $220k → 12%CADILLAC ROTARY CHARITIES: $10k → 13%VOUGE THEATRE: $5k → 13%WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER: $10k → 7%VETERANS FOR PEACE CHAPTER 50: $5k → 10%ALMA COLLEGE: $220k → 12%VOUGE THEATRE: $5k → 13%CHERRYLAND HUMANE SOCIETY: $10k → 7%PARAKLESIS INC (PEACE RANCH): $5k → 10%ALMA COLLEGE: $200k → 12%THE FRATERNAL ORDER OF EAGLES AERIE NO 383: $5k → 7%CHERRYLAND HUMANE SOCIETY: $600k → 10%ALMA COLLEGE: $200k → 12%CHILD & FAMILY SERVICES OF NW MICHIGAN: $5k → 7%CHERRYLAND HUMANE SOCIETY: $220k → 10%ALMA COLLEGE: $100k → 12%LEELANAU CONSERVANCY: $5k → 7%CHERRYLAND HUMANE SOCIETY: $220k → 10%CHERRYLAND HUMANE SOCIETY: $200k → 10%CHERRYLAND HUMANE SOCIETY: $150k → 10%SKEGEMOG RAPTOR CENTER: $5k → 10%HORSE NORTH RESCUE: $5k → 10%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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.9M · 4 repeat orgs$183k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +147% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 11 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
7

Total granted

$3.9M
$35k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+147%
0%

Still filing today

50%
57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $148k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsEducationArts & CultureEnvironmentOther
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

  • AC
    ALMA COLLEGE
    5× · 2021–2025 · $2.4M · revenue -2%
  • CH
    CHERRYLAND HUMANE SOCIETY
    5× · 2021–2025 · $1.4M · revenue +147%
  • WR
    WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER
    2× · 2024–2025 · $20k

Funded once

  • CF
    CHILD & FAMILY SERVICES OF NORTHWESTERN MICHIGAN INC
    one grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue -4%
  • LT
    LITTLE TRAVERSE BAY HUMANE SOCIETY
    one grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue 0%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2024 · $5k
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
Humane Society & Animal Rescue of Muskegon County

To shelter and find forever homes for homeless dogs and cats.

Animals
2
Lenawee Humane Society

Our mission is to save the lives of animals while enriching the lives of humans.

Animals
3
Animal Shelter of Crawford County

To operate an animal shelter.

Animals
4
St Clair County Humane Society

Maintain and care for incoming animals.

Animals
5
Humane Society of Southwestern Michigan

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.

Animals
6
Mid-Michigan Cat Rescue

Rescue & find homes for cats; spay, nueter and adopt out as many cats as possible. Provice foster care homes for unadopted. Provide Vet care. Educate the public about over population available programs.

—
7
Toledo Humane Society

Prevention/treatment of cruelty to animals

Animals
8
Humane Society of South Central Mi

Animal shelter - provide a safe haven for animals without homes.

Animals
9
Tama County Humane Society

To operate as an animal shelter by taking in stray or surrendered animals. We provide medical care and surgical care, including spaying and neutering of all animals if needed prior to adoption.

Animals
10
Tri Lakes Humane Society Inc

The organization is a no kill animal shelter which cares for homeless or abandoned dogs and cats and supervises their adoption and neutering when taken home by a commmunity member.

Animals
11
Lake Traverse Animal Rezcue

Rescue animals & provide vet services

Animals
12
Taylor County Wi Humane Society Inc

To work for the humane treatment of all animals, to shelter adoptable animals until loving and caring homes can be found for them,and to educate the community about responsible pet ownership and the importance of spay/neuter.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Little Traverse Bay Humane Society; the most unlike its peers is Fraternal Order of Eagles Aerie 383. 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 22 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
2/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ALMA COLLEGE: $2,440,000 · EducationALMA COLLEGECHERRYLAND HUMANE SOCIETY: $1,400,000 · AnimalsCHERRYLAND HUMANE SOCIETY+3 more: $20,000 · AnimalsCITY OPERA HOUSE: $67,662 · OtherWOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER: $20,000 · OtherCADILLAC ROTARY CHARITIES: $10,000 · OtherELK RAPIDS DISTRICT LIBRARY: $10,000 · OtherOASIS FAMILY RESOURCE CENTER: $10,000 · OtherCENTRAL MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY: $10,000 · OtherVOUGE THEATRE: $10,000 · Other+8 more: $40,000 · OtherTRAVERSE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA D/B/A TRAVERSE CITY PHILHARMONIC: $10,000 · Arts & CultureLEELANAU CONSERVANCY: $5,000 · Environment
Education$2,440,000Animals$1,420,000Other$177,662Arts & Culture$10,000Environment$5,000

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 budgetALMA COLLEGE: $2,440,000 over 5y, 1.9% of budgetCHERRYLAND HUMANE SOCIETY: $1,400,000 over 5y, 19% of budgetLittle Rascals Cat Sanctuary Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetTRAVERSE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA D/B/A TRAVERSE CITY PHILHARMONIC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetCHILD & FAMILY SERVICES OF NORTHWESTERN MICHIGAN INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLITTLE TRAVERSE BAY HUMANE SOCIETY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFRATERNAL ORDER OF EAGLES AERIE 383: $5,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetLEELANAU CONSERVANCY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTC PAW CAT RESCUE: $5,000 over 1y, 2.9% 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 ALMA COLLEGE ↗
  • Who funds CHERRYLAND HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds Little Rascals Cat Sanctuary Inc ↗
  • Who funds TRAVERSE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA D/B/A TRAVERSE CITY PHILHARMONIC ↗
  • Who funds CHILD & FAMILY SERVICES OF NORTHWESTERN MICHIGAN INC ↗
  • Who funds LITTLE TRAVERSE BAY HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds FRATERNAL ORDER OF EAGLES AERIE 383 ↗
  • Who funds LEELANAU CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds TC PAW CAT RESCUE ↗

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.

Oleson FoundationMI15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Oleson Foundation · Grand Traverse Regional Community Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Joseph G and Helen I Zimmerman Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Joseph G and Helen I Zimmerman Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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 22 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 Joseph G and Helen I Zimmerman’s filings →

    More from the funding graph