Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Northeast Michigan Community Service Agency Inc

Enhancing quality of life by empowering individuals and strengthening communities.

$22M
Granted FY2024still arriving
14
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$2.7M
Largest
01What you fund
01

What you funded, over time

By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 57% of NORTHEAST MICHIGAN COMMUNITY SERVICE AGENCY INC’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.

02FY2024 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 14 grants below total $5,627,252 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $22,405,006 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $16,777,754 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $26k
  • $50k–250k7 grants · $1.3M
  • $250k+6 grants · $4.3M
$242,339
Median grant
1
States reached
$27M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MID MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY INC$2,747,940
ROSCOMMON COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING$395,236
ALPENA AREA SENIOR CITIZENS COUNCIL INC$311,096
OGEMAW COMMISSION ON AGING$303,752
IOSCO COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING INC$284,298
OTSEGO COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING$284,131
CHEBOYGAN COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING$242,339
SUNRISE SIDE SENIOR SERVICES$218,261
CRAWFORD COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING$197,662
ALCONA COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING$181,458
MONTMORENCY COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING$167,856
OSCODA COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING$133,685
PRESQUE ISLE COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING$133,052
LEGAL SERVICES OF NORTHERN MICHIGAN INC$26,486
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 (FY17–24, $16.6M) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%CHEBOYGAN COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING: $266k → 12%SUNRISE SIDE SENIOR SERVICES: $231k → 14%ALPENA AREA SENIOR CITIZENS COUNCIL INC: $322k → 16%ROSCOMMON COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING: $412k → 16%OGEMAW COMMISSION ON AGING: $336k → 16%IOSCO COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING INC: $304k → 18%CHEBOYGAN COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING: $242k → 12%SUNRISE SIDE SENIOR SERVICES: $229k → 14%ALPENA AREA SENIOR CITIZENS COUNCIL INC: $316k → 16%ROSCOMMON COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING: $405k → 16%OGEMAW COMMISSION ON AGING: $319k → 16%IOSCO COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING INC: $296k → 18%CHEBOYGAN COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING: $241k → 12%SUNRISE SIDE SENIOR SERVICES: $218k → 14%ALPENA AREA SENIOR CITIZENS COUNCIL INC: $312k → 16%ROSCOMMON COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING: $400k → 16%OGEMAW COMMISSION ON AGING: $315k → 16%IOSCO COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING INC: $293k → 18%CHEBOYGAN COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING: $240k → 12%SUNRISE SIDE SENIOR SERVICES: $218k → 14%ALPENA AREA SENIOR CITIZENS COUNCIL INC: $311k → 16%ROSCOMMON COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING: $397k → 16%OGEMAW COMMISSION ON AGING: $312k → 16%IOSCO COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING INC: $289k → 18%Cheboygan County Council on Aging: $236k → 12%SUNRISE SIDE SENIOR SERVICES: $218k → 14%ALPENA AREA SENIOR CITIZENS COUNCIL INC: $305k → 16%ROSCOMMON COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING: $395k → 16%OGEMAW COMMISSION ON AGING: $304k → 16%IOSCO COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING INC: $284k → 18%CHEBOYGAN COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING: $226k → 12%SUNRISE SIDE SENIOR SERVICES: $207k → 14%ALPENA AREA SENIOR CITIZENS COUNCIL INC: $299k → 16%ROSCOMMON COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING: $393k → 16%OGEMAW COMMISSION ON AGING: $303k → 16%IOSCO COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING INC: $279k → 18%CHEBOYGAN COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING: $209k → 12%SUNRISE SIDE SENIOR SERVICES: $206k → 14%ALPENA AREA SENIOR CITIZENS COUNCIL INC: $298k → 16%ROSCOMMON COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING: $388k → 16%OGEMAW COMMISSION ON AGING: $292k → 16%IOSCO COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING INC: $265k → 18%CHEBOYGAN COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING: $203k → 12%Sunrise Side Senior Services: $203k → 14%Alpena Area Senior Citizens Council Inc: $295k → 16%Roscommon County Commission on Aging: $372k → 16%Ogemaw Commission on Aging: $278k → 16%Iosco County Commission on Aging Inc: $261k → 18%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.

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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$39M · 15 repeat orgs$3k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +41% since the first grant, against +32% for the ones you funded once.

15 repeat relationships — 14 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
1

Total granted

$39M
$3k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+41%
+32%

Still filing today

87%
100%

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesCrime & LegalHealthOther

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

  • MM
    MID MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $16M · revenue +121%
  • RC
    ROSCOMMON COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING
    8× · 2017–2024 · $3.2M · revenue +41%
  • OC
    OGEMAW COMMISSION ON AGING
    8× · 2017–2024 · $2.5M · revenue +31% · 29% of their budget

Funded once

  • AD
    ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $3k · revenue +32%

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
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
2
Area Agency On Aging of Western Michigan Inc

Through internal expertise, external partnerships, and advocacy, the area agency on aging of western michigan provides older adults, adults with disabilities, and their caregivers equitable access to services that promote independence and…

Human Services
3
Minot Commission On Aging Inc

The Agencys mission is to provide meals and health services to senior citizens in a seven county area.

Food & Nutrition
4
Midland County Council On Aging

Our mission is to promote and enrich quality of life for older adults and those who care for them by collaboratively providing meaningful services and opportunities.

Human Services
5
Dillon County Council On Aging

Provides senior center and congregate and home delivered meals, homemaker services allowing seniors to remain in their homes.

Human Services
6
Kosciusko County Council On Aging and Aged Inc

To provide services and resources to the aged citizens of kosciusko county indiana and surrounding areas including transportation, mobile meals, and senior activities to improve quality of life

7
Tippecanoe County Council On Aging Inc

Providing seniors with services and programs to promote overall wellness.

Human Services
8
Brooke County Committee On Aging

The purpose of the brooke county committee on aging is to promote services that will enhance the health, safety, and welfare of the senior population in its planning and service area, and serve as the primary agency within the local…

Human Services
9
Stark County Council On Aging

Provide elderly services to allow persons to stay in their own homes

Human Services
10
Tuscarawas County Committee On Aging

To provide opportunities to individualsover 50 years of age in tuscarawas county, ohiothrough healthy living, independence, physical andmental health, education, and recreational programs

Human Services
11
Wexford County Council On Aging

To provide resources and support for wexford county residents, sixty and older.

Human Services
12
Oceana County Council On Aging

To provide services to seniors in oceana county, including providing meals, transporation, social and health programming, senior trips, and homemaking services.

Human Services

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Otsego County Commission On Aging and the most unlike its peers is Alzheimer's Disease & Related Disorders Association 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

14 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 14 of the 16 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
14/14
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

MID MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY INC — $16,194,486 · OtherMID MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY INCOTSEGO COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING — $2,179,945 · OtherOTSEGO COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGINGCRAWFORD COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING — $1,489,154 · OtherCRAWFORD COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGINGPRESQUE ISLE COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING — $1,331,875 · OtherPRESQUE ISLE COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGINGOSCODA COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING — $1,096,358 · Other+1 more — $111,763 · OtherROSCOMMON COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING — $3,162,640 · Human ServicesROSCOMMON COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGINGOGEMAW COMMISSION ON AGING — $2,459,586 · Human ServicesOGEMAW COMMISSION ON AGINGALPENA AREA SENIOR CITIZENS COUNCIL INC — $2,459,452 · Human ServicesALPENA AREA SENIOR CITIZENS COUNCIL INCIOSCO CO COMMISSION ON AGING INC — $2,270,843 · Human ServicesIOSCO CO COMMISSION ON AGING INCCHEBOYGAN COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING — $1,863,107 · Human ServicesCHEBOYGAN COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGINGSUNRISE SIDE SENIOR SERVICES — $1,729,405 · Human ServicesSUNRISE SIDE SENIOR SERVICESALCONA COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING — $1,349,399 · Human ServicesALCONA COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGINGMONTMORENCY COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING — $1,309,321 · Human ServicesMONTMORENCY COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGINGLegal Services of Northern Michigan — $219,737 · Crime & LegalALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC — $3,455 · Health
Other$22,403,581Human Services$16,603,753Crime & Legal$219,737Health$3,455

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 budgetMID MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY INC — $16,194,486 over 8y, 17% of budgetROSCOMMON COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING — $3,162,640 over 8y, 21% of budgetOGEMAW COMMISSION ON AGING — $2,459,586 over 8y, 29% of budgetALPENA AREA SENIOR CITIZENS COUNCIL INC — $2,459,452 over 8y, 27% of budgetIOSCO CO COMMISSION ON AGING INC — $2,270,843 over 8y, 31% of budgetOTSEGO COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING — $2,179,945 over 8y, 15% of budgetCHEBOYGAN COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING — $1,863,107 over 8y, 22% of budgetSUNRISE SIDE SENIOR SERVICES — $1,729,405 over 8y, 30% of budgetALCONA COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING — $1,349,399 over 8y, 26% of budgetPRESQUE ISLE COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING — $1,331,875 over 8y, 18% of budgetMONTMORENCY COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING — $1,309,321 over 8y, 19% of budgetOSCODA COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING — $1,096,358 over 8y, 32% of budgetLegal Services of Northern Michigan — $219,737 over 8y, 1.9% of budgetALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC — $3,455 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds MID MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY INC
  • Who funds ROSCOMMON COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING
  • Who funds OGEMAW COMMISSION ON AGING
  • Who funds ALPENA AREA SENIOR CITIZENS COUNCIL INC
  • Who funds IOSCO CO COMMISSION ON AGING INC
  • Who funds OTSEGO COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING
  • Who funds CHEBOYGAN COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING
  • Who funds SUNRISE SIDE SENIOR SERVICES
  • Who funds ALCONA COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING
  • Who funds PRESQUE ISLE COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING
  • Who funds MONTMORENCY COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING
  • Who funds OSCODA COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING
  • Who funds Legal Services of Northern Michigan
  • Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC

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.

Consumers Energy FoundationMI21.6× affinity8 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Consumers Energy Foundation · Michigan Health Endowment Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Northeast Michigan Community Service Agency Inc 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
202122232425
no gov · 00%2%8%17%30%your share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    11report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    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 16 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