Skip to content
Michigan Farm Bureau at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Michigan Farm Bureau

MICHIGAN FARM BUREAU (mfb) is a member directed agricultural organization whose purpose is to represent, protect, and enhance the business, economic, social, and educational interests of our members located throughout the state of michigan.

$85k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$5k
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 2024.

Food & Nutrition$1.5MEducation$12kCommunity Improvement$12kHuman Services$7k
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $5,333, the rows itemized in this filing. The $84,635 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $79,302 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.
$5,333
Median grant
1
States reached
$22M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY$5,333
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 73% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%LIVINGSTON COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $19k → 5%NORTHWEST COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $16k → 7%OTTAWA COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $40k → 8%OAKLAND COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $33k → 8%EATON COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $18k → 9%MONROE COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $27k → 10%MACOMB COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $28k → 10%ALLEGAN COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $30k → 10%LAPEER COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $21k → 10%KENT COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $34k → 11%LENAWEE COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $22k → 12%SHIAWASSEE COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $22k → 12%CASS COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $17k → 12%IONIA COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $21k → 12%KALAMAZOO COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $20k → 12%TUSCOLA COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $35k → 12%GRATIOT COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $17k → 12%HIAWATHALAND COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $12k → 13%SANILAC COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $22k → 13%JACKSON COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $14k → 13%SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $17k → 13%WASHTENAW COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $30k → 14%CALHOUN COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $20k → 14%HILLSDALE COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $12k → 14%BAY COUNTRY FARM BUREAU: $20k → 14%VAN BUREN COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $21k → 14%MUSKEGON COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $10k → 15%BERRIEN COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $24k → 15%HURON SHORES COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $36k → 16%USDA NASS: $60k → 16%BRANCH COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $13k → 16%GENESEE COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $22k → 16%SAGINAW COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $23k → 18%ISABELLA COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $15k → 19%WAYNE COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $15k → 21%LIVINGSTON COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $11k → 5%CLINTON COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $27k → 9%BARRY COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $16k → 12%KALAMAZOO COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $14k → 12%GRATIOT COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $17k → 12%SAINT CLAIR COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $19k → 13%WASHTENAW COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $16k → 14%VAN BUREN COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $12k → 14%USDA NASS: $40k → 16%MONTCALM COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $12k → 12%INGHAM COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $20k → 16%MICHIGAN FFA FOUNDATION: $13k → 16%MICHIGAN FFA FOUNDATION: $13k → 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.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.2M · 41 repeat orgs$325k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +22% since the first grant, against +22% for those funded once.

41 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 40 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

41
23

Total granted

$1.2M
$325k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+22%
+22%

Still filing today

54%
65%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’24
RenewedFirst-time
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

  • WC
    Washtenaw County Farm Bureau
    4× · 2017–2020 · $61k · revenue +41%
  • MC
    Monroe County Farm Bureau Inc
    4× · 2017–2020 · $50k · revenue +19%
  • CC
    Clinton County Farm Bureau
    4× · 2017–2020 · $48k · revenue +40%

Funded once

  • KC
    Kent County Farm Bureau
    one grant, 2020 · $34k · revenue -29%
  • AC
    Allegan County Farm Bureaugraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $30k · revenue +53% · 42% of their budget
  • MC
    Macomb County Farm Bureau
    one grant, 2020 · $28k · revenue -39%
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
Crawford County Farm Bureau

The mission of the Crawford County Farm Bureau is to provide social, educational and promotional activities, programs and services for its membership, that will further the local agricultural industry.

—
2
Edgar County Farm Bureau

The Farm Bureau is organized to promote marketing of agricultural products and to provide educational and social activities for its members in Edgar County, Illinois. The organization is supported primarily through membership dues,…

Philanthropy
3
Shelby County Farm Bureau

The Farm Bureau is organized to promote marketing of agricultural products and to provide educational and social activites for its members in Shelby County, Illinois. The organization is supported primarily through membership dues,…

—
4
Wabash County Farm Bureau

To improve the economic well being of agriculture and enrich the quality of farm family life

—
5
Whiteside County Farm Bureau

The Farm Bureau is organized to promote marketing of agricultural products and to provide educational and social activities for its members in Whiteside County, Illinois.

—
6
Sangamon County Farm Bureau

Advocating the voice of agriculture through education and grassroots legislation.

—
7
Wayne County Farm Bureau

To maintain a strong well organized association of farmers dedicated to being a strong voice for agriculture meeting farmers needs and preserving and enhancing the quality of family farm life.

—
8
Iowa Farm Bureau Federation

To create a vibrant future for agriculture, farm families and their communities.

—
9
Will County Farm Bureau

Improving the economic welfare of the rural community in will county through our membership programs and activities and to be a voice for agriculture in will county for those who share an interest in the farming community and industry.

—
10
Western Palm Beach County Frm Bureau

To promote, protect and represent the educational, social and business interests of the farmers of the county and to enhance the future of agriculture.

—
11
Iowa Farm Bureau Federation

To create a vibrant future for agriculture, farm families and their communities.

—
12
Iowa Farm Bureau Federation

To create a vibrant future for agriculture, farm families their communities.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Washtenaw County Farm Bureau; the most unlike its peers is Capital Area United Way 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

41 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. 41 of the 64 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.

8
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
37/41
Grantees still filing
33/41
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $100,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientWashtenaw County Farm Bureau: $61,466 · Other+60 more: $1,392,613 · Other+60 moreOTSEGO COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $5,685 · Food & NutritionGREATER LANSING FOOD BANK: $5,453 · Food & Nutrition
Other$1,554,079Food & Nutrition$11,138

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWashtenaw County Farm Bureau: $61,466 over 4y, 18% of budgetOakland County Farm Bureau: $51,608 over 3y, 7.8% of budgetMonroe County Farm Bureau Inc: $50,132 over 4y, 20% of budgetOttawa County Farm Bureau: $50,030 over 2y, 16% of budgetClinton County Farm Bureau: $48,479 over 4y, 24% of budgetBerrien County Farm Bureau: $42,683 over 3y, 30% of budgetGratiot County Farm Bureau: $42,158 over 3y, 24% of budgetTuscola County Farm Bureau: $42,095 over 2y, 14% of budgetVan Buren County Farm Bureau: $39,960 over 3y, 36% of budgetKalamazoo County Farm Bureau: $39,481 over 3y, 16% of budgetLivingston County Farm Bureau: $36,188 over 3y, 15% of budgetKent County Farm Bureau: $34,261 over 1y, 12% of budgetGENESEE COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $33,253 over 3y, 13% of budgetSHIAWASSEE COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $30,578 over 2y, 23% of budgetIngham County Farm Bureau: $30,519 over 2y, 14% of budgetAllegan County Farm Bureau: $30,324 over 1y, 42% of budgetSAGINAW COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $28,299 over 2y, 20% of budgetMacomb County Farm Bureau: $27,830 over 1y, 8.9% of budgetLenawee County Farm Bureau: $27,571 over 2y, 17% of budgetCass County Farm Bureau: $26,410 over 2y, 42% of budgetST JOSEPH COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $24,584 over 2y, 40% of budgetMontcalm County Farm Bureau: $24,209 over 3y, 54% of budgetSanilac County Farm Bureau: $22,285 over 1y, 27% of budgetIonia County Farm Bureau: $20,941 over 1y, 29% of budgetSt Clair County Farm Bureau: $19,339 over 1y, 22% of budgetJackson County Farm Bureau: $19,307 over 2y, 23% of budgetEaton County Farm Bureau: $18,109 over 1y, 20% of budgetNorthwest Michigan County Farm Bureau: $16,046 over 1y, 21% of budgetHillsdale County Farm Bureau: $12,437 over 1y, 24% of budgetMuskegon County Farm Bureau: $10,464 over 1y, 10% of budgetMIDLAND COUNTY FARM BUREAU: $7,713 over 1y, 22% of budgetCapital Area United Way Inc: $7,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetGREATER LANSING FOOD BANK: $5,453 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Michigan Farm Bureau funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Michigan Farm Bureau. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%funder's 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
    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 · 0–5%
    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 64 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Michigan Farm Bureau’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