Skip to content

· Public charity

Middle Michigan Development Corporation

To retain and attract business in clare and isabella counties.

$37k
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$20k
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.

Public Safety & Disaster$2.8MHealth$370kHuman Services$368kEmployment$350kRecreation & Sports$270kArts & Culture$207kEducation$120kFood & Nutrition$87kOther$0
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $29,367, the rows itemized in this filing. The $37,224 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $7,857 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 $10k1 grant · $10k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
$19,697
Median grant
1
States reached
$308k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LONGER TABLE$19,697
TRITERRA LLC$9,670
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 (FY20–21, $28k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%WEST MIDLAND FAMILY CENTER: $10k → 19%ADOPTION OPTION INC: $10k → 9%COUNCIL ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND SEXUAL ASSAULT: $8k → 9%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.

11%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$525k · 11 repeat orgs$4.2M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +107% since the first grant, against +38% for those funded once.

11 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
475

Total granted

$525k
$4.2M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+107%
+38%

Still filing today

45%
4%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $29k 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
Human ServicesArts & CultureRecreation & SportsHealthEducationYouth DevelopmentOther
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
    Midland Center for the Arts Inc
    2× · 2020–2021 · $30k · revenue +107%
  • MC
    MIDLAND COUNTY AGRICULTURAL AND HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY
    2× · 2020–2021 · $18k · revenue +317%
  • IC
    ISABELLA CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER
    2× · 2020–2021 · $17k · revenue +26%

Funded once

  • CM
    CENTRAL MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2020 · $100k
  • MM
    MID MICHIGAN COLLEGE
    one grant, 2022 · $40k
  • MI
    MERRILL INSTITUTE INC
    one grant, 2022 · $30k
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
Rock Falls American Legion Post 902

Services for Members, Veterans and Community

—
2
Gladwyne Post Vfw 6956

Association of members of the armed forces

—
3
Harbor Country Chamber of Commerce

To promote business and economic development for eight towns in southwest michigan.

—
4
Gloucester Vfw Inc

Social club

Recreation & Sports
5
American Legion Post 470 Legion Post 470

Veterans organization

—
6
American Legion 0084

Operate the monroe, wi american legion post.

—
7
Amvets Department of Michigan

To enhance and safeguard the entitlements for all american veterans who have served honorably and to improve the quality of life for them, their families and the communities where they live through leadership, advocacy and services.

—
8
American Legion Post 28

The Primary Mission of the post is to promote health and welfare of veterans of all ages.

—
9
American Legion 496 Portage Post

Veterans service organization

—
10
James L Crawford Lodge 322

Fraternal order of elks

—
11
American Legion Post 153

Services for past and present members of the armed forces.

—
12
American Legion Post 75

Service to veterans and their familes

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Midland County Agricultural and Horticultural Society; the most unlike its peers is Isabella Child Development Center. 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

25 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 25 of the 488 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)
24/25
Grantees still filing
20/25
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NORTHERN LOGISTICS INC: $250,000 · OtherNORTHERN LOGISTICS INCCENTRAL MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY: $99,638 · Other+190 more: $2,255,658 · Other+190 moreMIDLAND COUNTY AGRICULTURAL AND HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY: $18,000 · Recreation & SportsGLADWIN COMMUNITY ARENA: $15,000 · Recreation & SportsMICHIGAN CENTER FOR CONSTRUCTION EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST AGREEMENT: $30,000 · EducationMidland Center for the Arts Inc: $30,000 · Arts & CultureADOPTION OPTION INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesWEST MIDLAND FAMILY CENTER: $10,000 · Human ServicesHaiti Foundation Against Poverty: $18,000 · Youth DevelopmentCAMP CENTAUR INC: $10,000 · Health
Other$2,605,296Recreation & Sports$33,000Education$30,000Arts & Culture$30,000Human Services$20,000Youth Development$18,000Health$10,000

Showing the 200 largest grantees by grant value.

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 budgetMICHIGAN CENTER FOR CONSTRUCTION EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST AGREEMENT: $30,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetMidland Center for the Arts Inc: $30,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetMIDLAND COUNTY AGRICULTURAL AND HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY: $18,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetHaiti Foundation Against Poverty: $18,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetGLADWIN COMMUNITY ARENA: $15,000 over 2y, 6.4% of budgetBPOE ALMA LODGE 1400: $10,000 over 1y, 4.5% of budgetCAMP CENTAUR INC: $10,000 over 1y, 29% of budgetFraternal Ordr of Eagles Aerie 3677: $10,000 over 1y, 7.5% of budgetADOPTION OPTION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetWEST MIDLAND FAMILY CENTER: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetAMERICAN LEGION POST 295: $10,000 over 1y, 21% 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 CENTER FOR CONSTRUCTION EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST AGREEMENT ↗
  • Who funds Midland Center for the Arts Inc ↗
  • Who funds MIDLAND COUNTY AGRICULTURAL AND HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds Haiti Foundation Against Poverty ↗
  • Who funds ISABELLA CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER ↗
  • Who funds GLADWIN COMMUNITY ARENA ↗

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.

Midland Area Community FoundationMI21.4× affinity9 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Midland Area Community Foundation · The Herbert H & Grace a Dow Foundation · Rollin M Gerstacker Foundation · The Charles J Strosacker Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Middle Michigan Development Corporation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Middle Michigan Development Corporation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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 488 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 Middle Michigan Development’s filings →

    More from the funding graph