Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Marshall United Way

To increase organized capacity of people to care for one another

$54k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$11k
Largest
01What you fund
0198% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Food & Nutrition$268kHuman Services$175kHealth$134kEducation$118kCrime & Legal$88kYouth Development$51kPublic Benefit$25kRecreation & Sports$16kOther$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 3 grants below total $25,542 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $53,892 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $28,350 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $15k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $11k
$9,250
Median grant
1
States reached
$256k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MOBILE MEALS INC OF MARSHALL$10,861
MARSHALL PUBLIC SCHOOLS$9,250
SOUTH MICHIGAN FOOD BANK$5,431
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–21, $44k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%FAMILY & CHILDREN SERVICES: $10k → 14%FAMILY & CHILDREN SERVICES: $5k → 14%CHARITABLE UNION: $5k → 14%CHARITABLE UNION: $5k → 14%CHARITABLE UNION: $5k → 14%CHARITABLE UNION: $5k → 14%CHARITABLE UNION: $5k → 14%FAMILY & CHILDREN SERVICES: $4k → 14%FAMILY & CHILDREN SERVICES: $100 → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$837k · 22 repeat orgs$67k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +16% since the first grant, against -14% for the ones you funded once.

22 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2025, 20 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

22
15

Total granted

$837k
$61k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+16%
-14%

Still filing today

27%
7%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 79% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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 ServicesHealthRecreation & SportsOther

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

  • FOUNTAIN CLINIC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $123k · revenue +338%
  • SOUTH MICHIGAN FOOD BANK
    4× · 2017–2020 · $29k · revenue +71%
  • CU
    CHARITABLE UNION
    5× · 2017–2021 · $25k · revenue +16%

Funded once

  • MA
    MARSHALL AREA COMMUNITY SERVICES
    one grant, 2023 · $10k
  • LS
    LEGAL SERVICES ORGANIZATION OF SC M
    one grant, 2024 · $7k
  • KN
    KIDS N STUFF MUSEUM
    one grant, 2024 · $7k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Central Illinois Foodbank Inc

The Foodbank's mission is to provide food, and develop awareness of and creative solutions for food insecurity. Annually, the Foodbank distributes approximately 9.5 million pounds of food to 130 food pantries, soup kitchens, children's…

Food & Nutrition
2
Food Bank of Iowa

The organization receives, warehouses, and distributes salvageable food items to non-profit tax exempt member agencies to feed the ill, needy, and infants.

Food & Nutrition
3
Community Food Bank of Central Alabama

To feed people in need today and foster collaborative solutions to end hunger tomorrow.

Food & Nutrition
4
Community Care Clinic of Rowan County Inc

Provides medical, dental and pharmaceutical care to uninsured or underserved rowan county residents using paid and volunteer medical professionals and skilled support staff.

Health
5
Fairbanks Community Food Bank Service Inc

To provide food for hungry people and to distribute surplus food that would ordinarily be discarded.

Food & Nutrition
6
Food Bank of Central New York

Food bank of central new york is a not-for-profit organization: our mission is to lead the effort to eliminate hunger in our region, through partnerships with others in our community, through education, advocacy, and distribution of…

Food & Nutrition
7
Community Care Center Inc

The mission of community care center is to provide assistance (without charge) to families, individuals, and children who are in need of food, clothing, or special assistance.

Human Services
8
Meals On Wheels Inc

Meals on wheels is the leading privately funded organization promoting dignity and independent living for the homebound, through volunteer delivery of nutritious meals in the greater indianapolis area.

Food & Nutrition
9
Community Clinic of Southwest Missouri

The mission of the community clinic of southwest missouri is to improve the health of people in our community without access to medical, dental, or mental health care.

10
Community Kitchen Inc

Provide food and service referrals

Food & Nutrition
11
Choptank Community Health System Inc

Primary health care services: delivery of health care to medically underserved community

Health
12
Central California Food Bank

Ccfb is dedicated to ending hunger, working with over 200 partner agencies to provide food to those experiencing hunger. our mission: transforming lives together, in the passionate pursuit to end hunger in central ca - one meal, one…

Food & Nutrition

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ella E M Brown Charitable Circle and the most unlike its peers is Mobile Meals Inc of Marshall. 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

8 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 38 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
4/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

MOBILE MEALS INC OF MARSHALL — $166,159 · OtherMOBILE MEALS INC OF MARSHALLLEGAL SERVICES ORGANIZATION OF SC MI — $70,294 · OtherLEGAL SERVICES ORGANIZATION OF SC MIGUARDIAN INC — $64,800 · OtherGUARDIAN INCMARSHALL PUBLIC SCHOOLS — $57,625 · OtherMARSHALL PUBLIC SCHOOLSMACS — $48,205 · OtherMACSMarshall Public Schools — $46,285 · OtherMarshall Public SchoolsMISCELLANEOUS — $32,980 · OtherSOUTH MICHIGAN FOOD BANK — $29,000 · Other+26 more — $205,882 · Other+26 moreFOUNTAIN CLINIC — $123,051 · HealthFOUNTAIN CLINICCHARITABLE UNION — $25,000 · Human ServicesFAMILY & CHILDREN SERVICES INC — $18,900 · Human ServicesCIR INC — $16,000 · Recreation & Sports
Other$721,230Health$123,051Human Services$43,900Recreation & Sports$16,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetMOBILE MEALS INC OF MARSHALL — $166,159 over 9y, 45% of budgetFOUNTAIN CLINIC — $123,051 over 8y, 2.5% of budgetSOUTH MICHIGAN FOOD BANK — $29,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetCHARITABLE UNION — $25,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetFAMILY & CHILDREN SERVICES INC — $18,900 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetCIR INC — $16,000 over 4y, 1.0% of budgetTHE ARC OF CALHOUN COUNTY — $702 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
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 MOBILE MEALS INC OF MARSHALL
  • Who funds FOUNTAIN CLINIC
  • Who funds SOUTH MICHIGAN FOOD BANK
  • Who funds CHARITABLE UNION
  • Who funds FAMILY & CHILDREN SERVICES INC
  • Who funds CIR INC
  • Who funds THE ARC OF CALHOUN COUNTY

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.

WK Kellogg FoundationMI21× affinity8 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: WK Kellogg Foundation · Battle Creek Community Foundation · United Way of South Central Michigan · Marcus Martin Farley and Mable Ston · Miller Foundation · 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 Marshall United Way 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 38 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph