Skip to content
McLaren Greater Lansing at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

McLaren Greater Lansing

Mclaren health care corporation, along with its subsidiaries, will be michigan's best value in healthcare as defined by quality outcomes and cost.

$62k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$16k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2023.

Recreation & Sports$5.8MEducation$1.1MHealth$388kCommunity Improvement$246kFood & Nutrition$205kArts & Culture$110kHuman Services$107kYouth Development$85kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $46,955, the rows itemized in this filing. The $61,955 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $15,000 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$11,400
Median grant
1
States reached
$860M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY$15,555
LANSING REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE$11,400
POTTER PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY$10,000
GREATER LANSING FOOD$10,000
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 (FY18–23, $112k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 85% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CRISTO REY COMMUNITY CENTER: $17k → 9%SOUTH LANSING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION: $40k → 16%SOUTH LANSING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION: $20k → 16%SOUTH LANSING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION: $15k → 16%SOUTH LANSING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION: $10k → 16%SOUTH LANSING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION: $10k → 16%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.

85%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$6.9M · 24 repeat orgs$1.2M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +61% since the first grant, against +15% for those funded once.

24 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 20 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

24
10

Total granted

$6.9M
$1.2M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+61%
+15%

Still filing today

63%
70%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’25
HealthYouth DevelopmentEducationCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesFood & NutritionOther
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

  • MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION
    4× · 2020–2023 · $4.0M · revenue +168%
  • LE
    LANSING ECONOMIC AREA PARTNERSHIP
    5× · 2017–2021 · $220k · revenue ×12
  • GL
    GREATER LANSING FOOD BANK
    8× · 2017–2025 · $120k · revenue +37%

Funded once

  • UC
    UNIVERSITY CORPORATE RESEARCH PARK I INC
    one grant, 2019 · $1.0M · revenue -231%
  • ER
    EATON RAPIDS MEDICAL CENTERgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $103k · revenue +39%
  • UC
    UNIVERSITY CLUB OF MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2021 · $50k · revenue -15%
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
Michigan Chamber of Commerce

To promote conditions favorable to job creation and business success in michigan.

—
2
Business Leaders for Michigan

Business leaders for michigan is a nonprofit, nonpartisan statewide organization driven by ceos from the state's leading employers, all working toward a shared goal: making michigan a top 10 state for jobs, talent and a thriving economy.…

—
3
Business Leaders for Michigan Foundation

Business leaders for michigan is a nonprofit, nonpartisan statewide organization driven by ceos from the state's leading employers, all working toward a shared goal: making michigan a top 10 state for jobs, talent and a thriving economy.…

Community Improvement
4
Michigan State Medical Society

Promote a health care environment that supports physicians in caring for and enhancing the health of michigan citizens through science, quality, and ethics in the practice of medicine.

—
5
Michigan Science Center

The mission of the michigan science center is to inspire curious minds of all ages to discover, explore and appreciate science, technology, engineering and math in a creative, dynamic learning environment.

Education
6
Saginaw County Chamber of Commerce

To be a catalyst for economic and community progress within the great lakes bay region.

—
7
Michigan Pharmacists Association

To encourage and support its members as professionals responsible for the delivery of patient-focused care.

—
8
Mclaren Greater Lansing

Mclaren health care corporation, along with its subsidiaries, will be michigan's best value in healthcare as defined by quality outcomes and cost.

Health
9
Michigan Farmers Market Association

Mifma supports the viability of all community-driven marketplaces so that they can connect all consumers to local farms and businesses.

Food & Nutrition
10
Mymichigan Medical Group

Creating healthy communities - together

Health
11
Michigan Assoc of Community Mental Health Boards

Assisting the community mental health boards of michigan in developing methods for mental health planning, care and treatment.

—
12
Michigan Enviromental Council

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

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Lansing Regional Chamber of Commerce; the most unlike its peers is American Heart Association Inc. 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

23 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. 23 of the 34 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
22/23
Grantees still filing
15/23
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $4,000,000 · EducationMICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION+1 more: $10,000 · EducationMICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY: $1,697,391 · OtherMICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITYUNIVERSITY CORPORATE RESEARCH PARK I INC: $1,000,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY CORPORATE RESEARCH PARK I INC+18 more: $645,588 · Other+18 moreLANSING ECONOMIC AREA PARTNERSHIP: $220,000 · Community ImprovementCAPITAL AREA HEALTH ALLIANCE: $36,000 · Community ImprovementEATON RAPIDS MEDICAL CENTER: $103,000 · HealthCARE FREE MEDICAL INC: $60,100 · Health+2 more: $10,000 · HealthGREATER LANSING FOOD BANK: $120,000 · Food & NutritionSOUTH LANSING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION: $95,000 · Human ServicesCatholic Charities of Ingham Eaton & Clinton Counties: $16,500 · Human ServicesBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF LANSING: $60,000 · Youth DevelopmentELE'S PLACE INC: $25,000 · Youth DevelopmentCAPITAL AREA SOCCER LEAGUE: $5,000 · Youth Development
Education$4,010,000Other$3,342,979Community Improvement$256,000Health$173,100Food & Nutrition$120,000Human Services$111,500Youth Development$90,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $4,000,000 over 4y, 6.0% of budgetLANSING ECONOMIC AREA PARTNERSHIP: $220,000 over 5y, 2.1% of budgetGREATER LANSING FOOD BANK: $120,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetEATON RAPIDS MEDICAL CENTER: $103,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSOUTH LANSING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION: $95,000 over 6y, 27% of budgetPOTTER PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $70,030 over 7y, 1.8% of budgetCARE FREE MEDICAL INC: $60,100 over 6y, 1.5% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF LANSING: $60,000 over 7y, 1.3% of budgetUNIVERSITY CLUB OF MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY: $50,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetIMPRESSION 5 SCIENCE CENTER: $50,000 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetACTIVE LIVING FOR ALL: $40,000 over 4y, 2.4% of budgetSt Vincent Catholic Charities: $40,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetLANSING REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $36,960 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetSPECIAL OLYMPICS MICHIGAN INC: $36,500 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetCAPITAL AREA HEALTH ALLIANCE: $36,000 over 2y, 15% of budgetELE'S PLACE INC: $25,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetCatholic Charities of Ingham Eaton & Clinton Counties: $16,500 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetLansing Promise: $10,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetTRI-COUNTY EMERGENCY MEDICAL CONTROL AUTHORITY: $8,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCAPITAL AREA DOWN SYNDROME ASSOCIATION: $5,000 over 1y, 7.6% of budgetCAPITAL AREA SOCCER LEAGUE: $5,000 over 1y, 1.6% 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 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY CORPORATE RESEARCH PARK I INC ↗
  • Who funds LANSING ECONOMIC AREA PARTNERSHIP ↗
  • Who funds GREATER LANSING FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds EATON RAPIDS MEDICAL CENTER ↗
  • Who funds SOUTH LANSING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds POTTER PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds CARE FREE MEDICAL INC ↗
  • Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF LANSING ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY CLUB OF MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds IMPRESSION 5 SCIENCE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds ACTIVE LIVING FOR ALL ↗
  • Who funds St Vincent Catholic Charities ↗
  • Who funds LANSING REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ↗
  • Who funds SPECIAL OLYMPICS MICHIGAN INC ↗
  • Who funds CAPITAL AREA HEALTH ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds ELE'S PLACE INC ↗
  • Who funds Catholic Charities of Ingham Eaton & Clinton Counties ↗
  • Who funds Lansing Promise ↗
  • Who funds TRI-COUNTY EMERGENCY MEDICAL CONTROL AUTHORITY ↗
  • Who funds American Heart Association Inc ↗
  • Who funds CAPITAL AREA DOWN SYNDROME ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds CAPITAL AREA SOCCER LEAGUE ↗

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.

Capital Region Commun…Lansing Economic Area…Joe D Pentecost Found…Dart Foundation fka S…Lansing Rotary Founda…Louis Berkowitz Famil…Delta Dental Plan of …Delta Dental FundUnited Way of South C…Consumers Energy Foun…Community Foundation …Jackson Charitable Fo…
Capital Region Community FoundationMI26.1× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Capital Region Community Foundation · Lansing Economic Area Partnership · Joe D Pentecost Foundation · Dart Foundation fka Solid Waste Management Foundation · Lansing Rotary Foundation · Louis Berkowitz Family Foundation Inc · Delta Dental Plan of Michigan Inc · Delta Dental Fund · United Way of South Central Michigan · Consumers Energy Foundation · Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan · Jackson Charitable 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 McLaren Greater Lansing funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from McLaren Greater Lansing. 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%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    12report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 34 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 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 McLaren Greater Lansing’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