Skip to content

· Public charity

Mmap Inc

To educate, counsel, and empower michigan's older adults and individuals with disabilities, and those who serve them, so that they can make informed health benefit decisions.

$1.2M
Granted FY2024still arriving
16
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$129k
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, FY2017 to 2024.

Human Services$9.3M
02FY2024 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 16 grants below total $630,407, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,199,816 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $569,409 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–50k12 grants · $329k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $291k
$27,967
Median grant
1
States reached
$309k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AREA AGENCY ON AGING 1-B$129,381
AREA AGENCY ON AGING$87,163
THE SENIOR ALLIANCE$74,837
AREA AGENCY ON AGING OF WESTERN MI$48,930
REGION VII AREA AGENCY ON AGING$39,884
UP AREA AGENCY ON AGING UPCAP SER$37,570
REGION IV AREA AGENCY ON AGING$35,388
REGION 2 AREA AGENCY ON AGING$27,967
TRI-COUNTY OFFICE ON AGING$26,358
VALLEY AREA AGENCY ON AGING$25,616
REGION 3B AREA AGENCY ON AGING$23,549
REGION 9 AREA AGENCY ON AGING NORTH$18,589
AREA AGENCY ON AGING OF NORTHWEST$18,162
SENIOR RESOURCES$14,533
REGION 3-A AREA AGENCY ON AGING$12,790
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 (FY17–24, $8.1M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 61% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%AREA AGENCY ON AGING 1-B: $373k → 8%AREA AGENCY ON AGING OF NORTHWEST: $56k → 10%AREA AGENCY ON AGING OF WESTERN MI: $141k → 11%UP AREA AGENCY ON AGING UPCAP SER: $100k → 13%REGION 3B AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $55k → 14%REGION VII AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $107k → 14%SENIOR RESOURCES: $67k → 15%REGION IV AREA AGENCY ON AGAIN: $66k → 15%REGION 9 AREA AGENCY ON AGING NORTH: $55k → 16%THE SENIOR ALLIANCE: $232k → 21%AREA AGENCY ON AGING 1-B: $355k → 8%AREA AGENCY ON AGING OF WESTERN MI: $120k → 11%UP AREA AGENCY ON AGING UPCAP SER: $84k → 13%REGION VII AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $106k → 14%REGION IV AREA AGENCY ON AGAIN: $64k → 15%THE SENIOR ALLIANCE: $174k → 21%AREA AGENCY ON AGING 1-B: $323k → 8%AREA AGENCY ON AGING OF WESTERN MI: $106k → 11%UP AREA AGENCY ON AGING UPCAP SER: $84k → 13%REGION VII AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $96k → 14%THE SENIOR ALLIANCE: $163k → 21%AREA AGENCY ON AGING 1-B: $301k → 8%AREA AGENCY ON AGING OF WESTERN MI: $99k → 11%UP AREA AGENCY ON AGING UPCAP SER: $83k → 13%REGION VII AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $86k → 14%THE SENIOR ALLIANCE: $140k → 21%AREA AGENCY ON AGING 1-B: $283k → 8%AREA AGENCY ON AGING OF WESTERN MI: $93k → 11%UP AREA AGENCY ON AGING UPCAP SER: $69k → 13%REGION VII AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $74k → 14%THE SENIOR ALLIANCE: $135k → 21%AREA AGENCY ON AGING 1-B: $216k → 8%AREA AGENCY ON AGING OF WESTERN MI: $62k → 11%UP AREA AGENCY ON AGING UPCAP SER: $60k → 13%REGION VII AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $59k → 14%THE SENIOR ALLIANCE: $108k → 21%AREA AGENCY ON AGING 1-B: $144k → 8%THE SENIOR ALLIANCE: $90k → 21%AREA AGENCY ON AGING 1-B: $129k → 8%THE SENIOR ALLIANCE: $75k → 21%AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $237k → 21%AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $199k → 21%AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $160k → 21%AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $152k → 21%AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $147k → 21%AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $109k → 21%AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $91k → 21%AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $87k → 21%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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$9.3M · 16 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

16 repeat relationships: 16 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
0

Total granted

$9.3M
$0

Still filing today

81%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
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

  • AN
    AgeWays Nonprofit Senior Services
    8× · 2017–2024 · $2.1M · revenue +59%
  • DA
    DETROIT AREA AGENCY ON AGING
    8× · 2017–2024 · $1.2M · revenue +54%
  • TS
    THE SENIOR ALLIANCE INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $1.1M · revenue +28%

Funded once

    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
    Area 1 Agency On Aging

    Area 1 agency on aging provides leadership and services that support and promote healthy aging.

    Human Services
    2
    Seniorage Area Agency On Aging

    A federally designated Area Agency on Aging whose mission is to bring independence enhancing supportive services to the 60+ population and their caregivers in our 17 county-wide service area.

    Human Services
    3
    Area Agency On Aging District 7 Inc

    Assisting individuals to maintain independence and personal choice by providing resource options and services

    —
    4
    Area Agency On Aging Region 9 Inc

    The organization's mission is to work with people, communities, and organizations to educate, prepare, and assist them in meeting the needs of the aging.the organization's vision is to be the recognized community leader in providing…

    Human Services
    5
    Area Agencies On Aging Association of Michigan

    The area agencies on aging association of michigan (4ami)'s mission is to provide a collective voice and take action to promote healthy aging, dignity, and independence for older adults, persons with disabilities, and caregivers. they…

    Social Science
    6
    Psa 3 Agency On Aging

    To promote the highest quality of life, area agency on aging 3 will provide access to a network of services, education, and advocacy as the region's aging and disability resource expert.

    —
    7
    Midland Area Agency On Aging

    The mission of midland area agency on aging is to provide caring and quality services to older adults and their families that enable independent living with dignity in their homes and communities.

    Human Services
    8
    Western Montana Area Vi Agency On Aging Inc

    The older American act intends that the area agency on aging shall be the leader relative to all aging issuers on behalf of all older persons in the planning and service area. This means that the area agency shall proactively carry out,…

    —
    9
    Ageguide Northeastern Illinois Area On Aging

    We strive to make aging easier through the development of a network of services for older persons designed to optimize the quality of their lives.

    Food & Nutrition
    10
    Marinette County Committee on Aging Inc

    Our mission at Marinette County Elderly Services is to assist older persons in maintaining a longer, healthier, and more fulfilled life.

    Human Services
    11
    Eastern Area Agency on Aging

    It is the mission of Eastern Area Agency on Aging to be the best source of information, options, and services for seniors, adults with disabilities, and caregivers.

    Human Services
    12
    Area Agency On Aging Planning and Service Area 2

    The area agency on aging, planning and service area 2 improves the quality of life for the older adults in its nine-county community by advocating for individuals, developing and supporting a strong network of services, and providing…

    Human Services
    How this is measured
    The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Region Vii Area Agency On Aging; the most unlike its peers is Valley Area Agency on Aging. 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

    13 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. 13 of the 16 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)
    0
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    13/13
    Grantees still filing
    13/13
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    AgeWays Nonprofit Senior Services: $2,124,853 · Human ServicesAgeWays Nonprofit Senior ServicesDETROIT AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $1,183,260 · Human ServicesDETROIT AREA AGENCY ON AGINGTHE SENIOR ALLIANCE INC: $1,116,453 · Human ServicesTHE SENIOR ALLIANCE INCAREA AGENCY ON AGING OF WESTERN MICHIGAN INC: $710,412 · Human ServicesAREA AGENCY ON AGING OF WESTERN MICHIGAN INCREGION VII AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $603,184 · Human ServicesREGION VII AREA AGENCY ON AGINGUPCAP SERVICES INC: $560,623 · Human ServicesUPCAP SERVICES INCREGION IV AREA AGENCY ON AGING INC (WITH FOSTER GRANDPARENTS PROGRAM): $386,801 · Human ServicesNORTHEAST MICHIGAN COMMUNITY SERVICE AGENCY INC: $310,155 · Human ServicesSenior Resources of West Michigan: $306,389 · Human ServicesNORTHWEST SENIOR RESOURCES INC: $299,853 · Human Services+2 more: $520,863 · Human Services+2 moreValley Area Agency on Aging: $415,198 · OtherValley Area Ag…TRI-COUNTY OFFICE ON AGING: $319,424 · OtherTRI-COUNTY OFF…REGION 3-A AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $245,987 · OtherREGION 3-A ARE…BRANCH HILLSDALE ST JOSEPH CHA: $169,548 · OtherBRANCH HILLSDA…
    Human Services$8,122,846Other$1,150,157

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

    25%50%75%100%$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetAgeWays Nonprofit Senior Services: $2,124,853 over 8y, 0.7% of budgetDETROIT AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $1,183,260 over 8y, 0.3% of budgetTHE SENIOR ALLIANCE INC: $1,116,453 over 8y, 0.8% of budgetAREA AGENCY ON AGING OF WESTERN MICHIGAN INC: $710,412 over 8y, 0.3% of budgetREGION VII AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $603,184 over 8y, 0.3% of budgetUPCAP SERVICES INC: $560,623 over 8y, 0.4% of budgetValley Area Agency on Aging: $415,198 over 8y, 0.4% of budgetREGION IV AREA AGENCY ON AGING INC (WITH FOSTER GRANDPARENTS PROGRAM): $386,801 over 8y, 0.4% of budgetNORTHEAST MICHIGAN COMMUNITY SERVICE AGENCY INC: $310,155 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetSenior Resources of West Michigan: $306,389 over 8y, 0.3% of budgetNORTHWEST SENIOR RESOURCES INC: $299,853 over 8y, 0.4% of budgetREGION 3B AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $262,595 over 8y, 0.3% of budgetREGION II COMMISSION ON SERVICES TO THE AGING: $258,268 over 8y, 0.2% 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 AgeWays Nonprofit Senior Services ↗
    • Who funds DETROIT AREA AGENCY ON AGING ↗
    • Who funds THE SENIOR ALLIANCE INC ↗
    • Who funds AREA AGENCY ON AGING OF WESTERN MICHIGAN INC ↗
    • Who funds REGION VII AREA AGENCY ON AGING ↗
    • Who funds UPCAP SERVICES INC ↗
    • Who funds Valley Area Agency on Aging ↗
    • Who funds REGION IV AREA AGENCY ON AGING INC (WITH FOSTER GRANDPARENTS PROGRAM) ↗
    • Who funds NORTHEAST MICHIGAN COMMUNITY SERVICE AGENCY INC ↗
    • Who funds Senior Resources of West Michigan ↗
    • Who funds NORTHWEST SENIOR RESOURCES INC ↗
    • Who funds REGION 3B AREA AGENCY ON AGING ↗
    • Who funds REGION II COMMISSION ON SERVICES TO THE AGING ↗

    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.

    Michigan Health Endowment FundMI30.2× affinity12 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: Michigan Health Endowment Fund · DTE Energy Foundation · 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 Mmap Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Mmap Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

    2024
    ’20’21’22’23’24’25
    no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
      no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
      0get no government money at all
      9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
      0rely on government for over half their income
      ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
      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 Mmap Inc?

      Find your warmest path to Mmap Inc 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 16 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 Mmap’s filings →

      More from the funding graph