· Public charity
Lansing Economic Area Partnership
We build a stronger community for all, working everyday to grow, retain and attract business to the region.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 75 grants below total $24,403,104 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $27,357,995 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $2,954,891 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k19 grants · $128k
- $10k–50k34 grants · $722k
- $50k–250k20 grants · $2.1M
- $250k+2 grants · $21M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| DELTA CHARTER TOWNSHIP | $17,059,815 |
| LANSING BOARD WATER AND LIGHT | $4,435,796 |
| CUSHMAN & WAKEFIELD US INC | $190,000 |
| FOSTER SWIFT COLLINS & SMITH PC | $188,620 |
| PUBLIC SECTOR CONSULTANTS INC | $187,929 |
| THE FLEDGE | $130,000 |
| BEST PRACTICES CONSULTING SERVICE LLC | $111,613 |
| MI-SBDC | $109,995 |
| TRITERRA | $107,745 |
| DYMAXION DEVELOPMENT LLC | $100,000 |
| HOLLAND ENGINEERING | $98,390 |
| CITY OF GRAND LEDGE1 | $92,000 |
| TRANSFORMATION GEMS | $90,000 |
| MOONSAIL NORTH LLC | $88,000 |
| ALLEN NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER | $82,610 |
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 (FY18–24, $732k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 78% 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
236 repeat relationships — 24 still active in FY2024, 212 since wound down; 49 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.5M 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
- NCNational Collegiate Inventors & Innovators Alliance Inc2× · 2022–2023 · $330k · revenue +30%
- ANAllen Neighborhood Center5× · 2020–2024 · $248k · revenue +147%
- TGTransformation Gems5× · 2020–2024 · $245k · revenue +11% · 88% of their budget
Funded once
- LBLANSING BOARD WATER AND LIGHTone grant, 2022 · $2.7M
- MFM-100 FARM LLCone grant, 2023 · $1.0M
- MSMOMENT STRATEGIESone grant, 2023 · $329k
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.
To offer education, assistance and resources to women and families in the greater lansing area.
Lansing Promise helps students in gaining access to higher education through readiness and scholarships.
To promote conditions favorable to job creation and business success in michigan.
To cultivate a thriving and connected startup ecosystem in nw lower michigan.
Public library
Education and promotion of employee ownership. the organization provides educational resources, training, and outreach toward the benefits of employee-owned enterprises.
The Center's mission is to inspire, entertain, educate, and serve all in Northern Michigan year-round by presenting exceptional experiences across the full spectrum of the performing arts and offering impactful educational opportunities.
The organization's mission is to provide citizens of michigan with an understanding of how current policy initiatives will affect their well-being; promote the common good, economic growth and general welfare of the citizens of michigan;…
Mid michigan community action guides local residents on the path to self-sufficiency through empowerment, education and community enrichment.
Association of consulting engineers
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The South Side Community Coalition and the most unlike its peers is Cardboard Prophets. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 22 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 7% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.9% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
102 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. 102 of the 1,072 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 POST-RETIREMENT BENEFIT PLAN AND TRUST FOR ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES OF LANSING BOARD ↗
- Who funds National Collegiate Inventors & Innovators Alliance Inc ↗
- Who funds Allen Neighborhood Center ↗
- Who funds Transformation Gems ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR COMMUNITY BASED ENTERPRISE ↗
- Who funds EASTMINSTER COMMUNITY CONCERNS INC ↗
- Who funds REFUGEE DEVELOPMENT CENTER ↗
- Who funds DOWNTOWN LANSING PARTNERSHIP INC ↗
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: Capital Region Community Foundation · Desk Drawer Fund · Arts Council of Greater Lansing · Joe D Pentecost Foundation · Lansing Rotary Foundation · Re Olds Foundation · Jackson Charitable Foundation Inc · McLaren Greater Lansing · United Way of South Central Michigan · Cinnaire Corporation · Greater Lansing Destination Development Foundation · Dart Foundation fka Solid Waste Management 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 Lansing Economic Area Partnership 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.
- National Collegiate Inventors & Innovators Alliance Inc — 38% of income from government
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.