Skip to content

· Public charity

Michigan Student Assembly of the University of Michigan

We, the Michigan Student Assembly (MSA) of the University of Michigan, are comprised of students of different backgrounds who have come together to serve our fellow students and the entire University of Michigan community.

$695k
Granted FY2024still arriving
33
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$49k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Recreation & Sports$580kArts & Culture$197kEducation$87kCivil Rights$85kScience & Tech$73kHousing & Shelter$50kReligion$43kInternational$27kOther$0
02FY2024 · 33 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 33 grants below total $331,339, the rows itemized in this filing. The $694,797 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $363,458 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.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k24 grants · $171k
  • $10k–50k9 grants · $160k
$7,550
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE MUSLIM COALITION$48,614
Individual grant recipient$19,000
The Ann Arbor Tenants Union$18,000
University of Michigan Ballroom Dance Team$13,756
MRun - Running Club at the University of Michigan$13,673
Jewish Resource Center$13,064
Muslim Students Association$11,855
Not Even Really Drama Students (NERDS)$11,052
Michigan TAAL$10,830
College Mentors for Kids at University of Michigan$9,730
New Michigan Table Tennis Club$9,110
The Pakistani Student Association$8,960
Michigan All-Girl Competitive Cheer$8,869
University of Michigan Science Olympiad (UMSO)$8,452
Individual grant recipient$8,148
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 (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%Inter-Cooperative Council: $32k → 14%The Ann Arbor Tenants Union: $18k → 14%Jewish Resource Center: $13k → 14%Michigan Fashion Media Summit (MFMS): $10k → 14%Michigan All-Girl Competitive Cheer: $10k → 14%Michigan Intercollegiate Polo Club: $9k → 14%Michigan All-Girl Competitive Cheer: $9k → 14%New Michigan Table Tennis Club: $9k → 14%THE MUSLIM COALITION: $49k → 14%Rackham Student Government: $42k → 14%THE MUSLIM COALITION: $37k → 14%Rackham Student Government: $19k → 14%MICHIGAN WATERSKI TEAM: $19k → 14%Sae-Formula Car Team -: $18k → 14%Men's Ultimate Frisbee: $16k → 14%Men's Club Ice Hockey: $16k → 14%Synchronized Skating Team: $15k → 14%Men's Rugby: $14k → 14%University of Michigan Ballroom Dance Team: $14k → 14%MRun - Running Club at the University of Michigan: $14k → 14%Men's Club Ice Hockey: $13k → 14%Rackham Student Government: $13k → 14%Michigan Sailing Team: $13k → 14%Synchronized Skating Team: $12k → 14%Muslim Students Association: $12k → 14%Michigan Men's Rowing Team: $11k → 14%MRun - Running Club at the University of Michigan: $11k → 14%Not Even Really Drama Students (NERDS): $11k → 14%Michigan TAAL: $11k → 14%Men's Rugby: $11k → 14%Muslim Students Association: $10k → 14%Michigan Aeronautical Science Association: $10k → 14%Flywheel - Women's Ultimate Frisbee: $10k → 14%TEDXUOFM: $10k → 14%Men's Ultimate Frisbee: $10k → 14%University of Michigan Solar Car Team: $10k → 14%MIST: $10k → 14%College Mentors for Kids at University of Michigan: $10k → 14%MICHIGAN WATERSKI TEAM: $9k → 14%University of Michigan Ballroom Dance Team: $9k → 14%Mock Trial Team: $9k → 14%Flywheel - Women's Ultimate Frisbee: $9k → 14%MRun - Running Club at the University of Michigan: $9k → 14%In the Round Productions at UM: $9k → 14%Michigan Club Tennis: $9k → 14%The Pakistani Student Association: $9k → 14%Chinese Basketball Team UM: $9k → 14%Flywheel - Women's Ultimate Frisbee: $9k → 14%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 7% of Michigan Student Assembly of the University of Michigan’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 100% of the giving stays in MI; by stated purpose, 88%.

Michigan Student Assembly of the University of Michiganlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 6.3% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

75%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$948k · 39 repeat orgs$315k to everyone else

39 repeat relationships: 22 still active in FY2024, 17 since wound down; 11 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

39
27

Total granted

$948k
$222k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
+46%

Still filing today

8%
15%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 72% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $93k 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
ReligionEducationEnvironmentHealthRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • MC
    MUSLIM COALITION
    2× · 2023–2024 · $85k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    4× · 2021–2024 · $81k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    4× · 2020–2023 · $44k

Funded once

  • TI
    THE INTER-COOPERATIVE COUNCIL AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGANgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $32k · revenue +39%
  • RO
    REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
    one grant, 2020 · $16k
  • T
    TEDXUOFM
    one grant, 2020 · $10k
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
05the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 77 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
4/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MUSLIM COALITION: $85,353 · OtherMUSLIM COALITIONIndividual grant recipient: $81,385 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $43,595 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $41,848 · Other+68 more: $934,765 · Other+68 moreMICHIGAN TAAL: $25,433 · Recreation & SportsJEWISH RESOURCE CENTER: $20,057 · ReligionBlueprints for Pangaea: $12,864 · EnvironmentMIST: $9,800 · EducationDANCE MARATHON INC: $7,411 · Health
Other$1,186,946Recreation & Sports$25,433Religion$20,057Environment$12,864Education$9,800Health$7,411

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE INTER-COOPERATIVE COUNCIL AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $32,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetJEWISH RESOURCE CENTER: $20,057 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetBlueprints for Pangaea: $12,864 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetMIST: $9,800 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetMichigan Rowing Association: $5,857 over 1y, 3.5% 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 THE INTER-COOPERATIVE COUNCIL AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN ↗
  • Who funds MICHIGAN TAAL ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH RESOURCE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds Blueprints for Pangaea ↗

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.

American Online Giving Foundation IncDE5.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Michigan Student Assembly of the University of Michigan funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Michigan Student Assembly of the University of Michigan. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Michigan Student Assembly of the University of Michigan?

    Find your warmest path to Michigan Student Assembly of the University of Michigan 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 77 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 Student Assembly of the University of Michigan’s filings →

    More from the funding graph