Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersAlso receives grants — funding profile →
Plinth

· Public charity

Michigan Civic Education Fund

To initiate, cultivate, and fund strategic nonpartisan efforts in michigan to promote economic and educational opportunity; enhance the quality of life and social welfare; defend and improve government accountability, ethics, and transparency; and strengthen democracy and civic participation.

$12M
Granted FY2024still arriving
39
Grants FY2024still arriving
9
States reached
$3.6M
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.

Public Benefit$9.0MEducation$3.5MCivil Rights$1.9MPhilanthropy$950kHealth$635kCommunity Improvement$439kArts & Culture$298kHuman Services$248kOther$0
02FY2024 · 39 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k13 grants · $311k
  • $50k–250k20 grants · $2.1M
  • $250k+6 grants · $9.7M
$75,000
Median grant
9
States reached
$2.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE VOTER PROJECT FUND$3,590,000
MICHIGAN VOICES$2,315,000
ENGAGE MICHIGAN$1,945,000
PROMOTE THE VOTE FUND$825,000
NEW VENTURE FUND$610,000
PA ALLIANCE FOUNDATION$415,000
ORGANIZING EMPOWERMENT FUND$230,000
482 FORWARD$185,000
MICHIGAN DISABILITY$150,000
COMMITTEE TO PROTECT HEALTHCARE$150,000
MICHIGAN UNITED$142,500
EQUALITY MICHIGAN$140,000
JCG MICHIGAN INC$135,000
GREATER FLINT HEALTH COALITION$115,000
MIIGWECH INC$105,000
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 (FY21–24, $320k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 73% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%TIDES CENTER: $45k → 10%HISPANIC AMERICAN COUNCIL INC: $25k → 12%SOUTHWESTERN MICHIGAN URBAN LEAGUE: $8k → 14%HEALTHY HOUSE: $20k → 12%VOCES: $8k → 14%HISPANIC AMERICAN COUNCIL INC: $19k → 12%HISPANIC CENTER OF WESTERN MICHIGAN: $40k → 11%MOTHERS OF HOPE: $25k → 12%ACCESS: $70k → 21%MOTHERS OF HOPE: $11k → 12%ACCESS: $50k → 21%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.

Which US states your grants reach

IL
WI
MI
NY
OH
PA
CA
VA
DC
FL

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.

61%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$10.0M · 22 repeat orgs$6.3M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +77% since the first grant, against +16% for the ones you funded once.

22 repeat relationships — 17 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 16 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

22
19

Total granted

$10.0M
$1.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+77%
+16%

Still filing today

95%
74%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 54% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5.2M went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24
Civil RightsCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesEnvironmentPublic BenefitEducationOther

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

  • MICHIGAN VOICES
    4× · 2021–2024 · $3.0M · revenue +223%
  • PT
    PROMOTE THE VOTE FUND INC
    3× · 2021–2024 · $1.0M · revenue +860% · 25% of their budget
  • EM
    EQUALITY MICHIGAN
    4× · 2021–2024 · $805k · revenue +169%

Funded once

  • OP
    Ohio Progressive Collaborative Education Fund
    one grant, 2023 · $415k · revenue -59%
  • AC
    AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FUND OF MICHIGANgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $110k · revenue +26%
  • PT
    PROMOTE THE VOTE
    one grant, 2021 · $75k

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
Elevated Voices Inc

Voter education around policy

—
2
For Michigan

To empower students in Michigan's higher education institutions to take leadership in their community and increase their participation in the democratic process. We strengthen students' voices in developing and advocating for legislation…

Civil Rights
3
Michigan Civic Action Fund

Promoting community welfare and providing community education in michigan by increasing voter participation through nonpartisan research and voter mobilization; increasing voter awareness of public policy issues through nonpartisan…

Civil Rights
4
Michigan Civic Education Fund

To initiate, cultivate, and fund strategic nonpartisan efforts in michigan to promote economic and educational opportunity; enhance the quality of life and social welfare; defend and improve government accountability, ethics, and…

Civil Rights
5
Action for Liberation

Michigan Liberation is dedicated to the leadership development of community members and creation of effective campaigns to advance racial, gender and economic justice in Michigan

Civil Rights
6
Michigan League for Public Policy

The league's mission is to promote racial equity, economic security, health, and well being for all people in michigan through policy change.

Human Services
7
Michigan Advocacy Program

To advance the safety, independence, and economic stability of those most affected by poverty, racism, and other structurally oppressive systems by increasing access to justice and working for systemic solutions.

Crime & Legal
8
Promote the Vote Inc

Promote the vote works to expand the electorate, educate citizens on voting rights, reform redistricting, engage civic participation and provide election protection in michigan, and to advocate on behalf of those issues. as it relates to…

Civil Rights
9
Michigan Center of Accountability for Republicans

Social welfare and issue advocacy

Civil Rights
10
We the People Action Fund

To promote racial and economic justice throughout Michigan by training and organizing community leaders across the state; Engaging community members in the development of thoughtful public policy solutions through nonpartisan educational…

Civil Rights
11
Equality Michigan Action Network

To provide policy expertise, political acumen, and broad-based relationships across the political spectrum to propel the mission, which is to achieve full equality and respect for all michgan residents, regardless of sexual orientation,…

Civil Rights
12
Community Education Commission

CEC works with diverse stakeholders across Detroit to develop critical resources and system-level solutions that address common challenges faced by Detroit families in accessing quality education.

Education

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Michigan Voices and the most unlike its peers is Freedom Institute for Economic Social Justice & People Empowerment. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyPolicy Research and AdvocacyLgbtq+ Community SupportCommunity FoundationsHealth Access Advocacy and …Faith-Based Social ServicesImmigrant Worker SupportWomen & Girls Leadership De…Environmental Conservation …Christian Missionary Organi…Developmental Disabilities …
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 17 years old; the field is 17. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number20%11%<5yr13%23%5–10yr20%25%10–20yr15%17%20–35yr14%19%35–55yr18%6%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value20%24%<5yr13%35%5–10yr20%27%10–20yr15%5%20–35yr14%9%35–55yr18%1%55yr+

The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 11% of your grantees by number, and just 24% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
2%1/63
the rest of the field
12%
6,511/53,793

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.

04the grantee network

54 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. 54 of the 63 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.

6
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
16
Early backer (in before they grew)
54/54
Grantees still filing
27/54
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

THE VOTER PROJECT FUND — $3,590,000 · Civil RightsTHE VOTER PROJECT FUNDMICHIGAN VOICES — $3,025,500 · Civil RightsMICHIGAN VOICESPROMOTE THE VOTE FUND INC — $1,045,000 · Civil RightsPROMOTE THE VOTE FUND INCEQUALITY MICHIGAN — $804,500 · Civil RightsEQUALITY MICHIGANOhio Progressive Collaborative Education Fund — $415,000 · Civil RightsPA Alliance Foundation — $415,000 · Civil Rights+8 more — $747,517 · Civil Rights+8 moreProgress Michigan Education Inc — $3,176,000 · Public BenefitProgress Michigan Educ…+3 more — $175,000 · Public BenefitMICHIGAN DISABILITY RIGHTS COALITION — $200,000 · OtherMICHIGAN D…JCG MICHIGAN INC — $135,000 · OtherJCG MICHIG…AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FUND OF MICHIGAN — $110,000 · OtherAMERICAN C…COURIER NEWSROOM INC — $100,000 · OtherCOURIER NE…COMMUNITY AIDS RESOURCE & EDUCATION SERVICES OF SOUTHWEST MICHIGAN — $100,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY …The Michigan Center for Civic Education — $80,000 · OtherPROMOTE THE VOTE — $75,000 · OtherMICHIGAN ORGANIZING PROJECT — $246,500 · OtherMICHIGAN O…COMMITTEE TO PROTECT HEALTH CARE EDUCATION FUND — $150,000 · OtherCOMMITTEE …GREATER FLINT HEALTH COALITION INC — $115,000 · OtherGREATER FL…INTERFAITH STRATEGY FOR ADVOCACY AND ACTION IN THE COMMUNITY — $55,500 · Other+12 more — $292,300 · Other+12 moreNEW VENTURE FUND — $610,000 · EnvironmentPUBLIC DEMOCRACY AMERICA — $100,000 · EnvironmentBerrien Connection — $82,500 · EnvironmentMICHIGAN LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND — $50,000 · Environment+1 more — $15,000 · EnvironmentMIIGWECH INC — $246,500 · Community ImprovementDETROIT CHANGE INITIATIVE — $90,000 · Community ImprovementURBAN CORE COLLECTIVE — $70,000 · Community ImprovementDETROIT HISPANIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION — $58,000 · Community ImprovementLOCAL FIRST EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION — $50,000 · Community ImprovementCOMMUNITY PARTNERS — $35,000 · Community Improvement482 FORWARD — $288,500 · EducationWe the People MI — $50,000 · EducationRED WINE & BLUE EDUCATION FUND — $35,000 · EducationSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC — $25,000 · EducationARAB COMMUNITY CENTER FOR ECONOMIC AND S — $120,000 · Human ServicesHEALTHY HOUSE — $64,200 · Human ServicesTIDES CENTER — $45,000 · Human ServicesHISPANIC CENTER OF WESTERN MICHIGAN INC — $40,000 · Human ServicesMOTHERS OF HOPE — $36,000 · Human Services+2 more — $15,000 · Human Services
Civil Rights$10,042,517Public Benefit$3,351,000Other$1,659,300Environment$857,500Community Improvement$549,500Education$398,500Human Services$320,200

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetTHE VOTER PROJECT FUND — $3,590,000 over 1y, 21% of budgetProgress Michigan Education Inc — $3,176,000 over 4y, 65% of budgetMICHIGAN VOICES — $3,025,500 over 4y, 21% of budgetPROMOTE THE VOTE FUND INC — $1,045,000 over 3y, 25% of budgetEQUALITY MICHIGAN — $804,500 over 4y, 24% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND — $610,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetOhio Progressive Collaborative Education Fund — $415,000 over 1y, 6.9% of budgetPA Alliance Foundation — $415,000 over 1y, 5.9% of budget482 FORWARD — $288,500 over 2y, 6.3% of budgetMIIGWECH INC — $246,500 over 4y, 49% of budgetMICHIGAN ORGANIZING PROJECT — $246,500 over 3y, 2.3% of budgetORGANIZING EMPOWERMENT FUND INC — $230,000 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetMICHIGAN DISABILITY RIGHTS COALITION — $200,000 over 2y, 3.1% of budgetSTATE VOICES — $181,500 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetCOMMITTEE TO PROTECT HEALTH CARE EDUCATION FUND — $150,000 over 1y, 24% of budgetARAB COMMUNITY CENTER FOR ECONOMIC AND S — $120,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetGREATER FLINT HEALTH COALITION INC — $115,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FUND OF MICHIGAN — $110,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetCOUNT MI VOTE EDUCATION FUND — $100,000 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetPUBLIC DEMOCRACY AMERICA — $100,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetCOMMUNITY AIDS RESOURCE & EDUCATION SERVICES OF SOUTHWEST MICHIGAN — $100,000 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetLEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF MICHIGAN EDUCATION FUND — $91,017 over 3y, 54% of budgetDETROIT CHANGE INITIATIVE — $90,000 over 2y, 9.6% of budgetBerrien Connection — $82,500 over 3y, 100% of budgetThe Michigan Center for Civic Education — $80,000 over 1y, 26% of budgetURBAN CORE COLLECTIVE — $70,000 over 1y, 4.7% of budgetHEALTHY HOUSE — $64,200 over 2y, 24% of budgetDETROIT HISPANIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION — $58,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetINTERFAITH STRATEGY FOR ADVOCACY AND ACTION IN THE COMMUNITY — $55,500 over 2y, 3.1% of budgetAFFIRMATIONS COMMUNITY CENTER — $50,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetCENTER FOR EMPOWERED POLITICS EDUCATION FUND — $50,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetEmgage Foundation Inc — $50,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetWe the People MI — $50,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetLOCAL FIRST EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION — $50,000 over 1y, 9.9% of budgetMICHIGAN LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND — $50,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetTIDES CENTER — $45,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHISPANIC CENTER OF WESTERN MICHIGAN INC — $40,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetTHE DIATRIBE INC — $40,000 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetMOTHERS OF HOPE — $36,000 over 2y, 3.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY PARTNERS — $35,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRED WINE & BLUE EDUCATION FUND — $35,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC — $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGLPA-LEAD — $25,000 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetAsian & Pacific Islander American Vote — $25,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION — $23,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetKALAMAZOO GAY & LESBIAN RESOURCE CENTER — $20,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetASIAN AND PACIFIC ISLANDER AMERICAN VOTE - MICHIGAN — $20,000 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetUFW FOUNDATION — $20,000 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.

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.

Kalamazoo Community F…Tides FoundationNew Venture FundMichigan VoicesHopewell FundAmalgamated Charitabl…Rockefeller Philanthr…Michigan Nonprofit As…State VoicesWK Kellogg FoundationWindward FundNEO Philanthropy Inc
Kalamazoo Community FoundationMI41.3× affinity18 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Kalamazoo Community Foundation · Tides Foundation · New Venture Fund · Michigan Voices · Hopewell Fund · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Michigan Nonprofit Association · State Voices · WK Kellogg Foundation · Windward Fund · NEO Philanthropy Inc

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 Michigan Civic Education Fund 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
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    10report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY20–25

    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Michigan Civic Education Fund?

    Find your warmest path to Michigan Civic Education Fund 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.

    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 63 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    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 camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home
    State money flows
    the interactive map of money crossing state lines