Skip to content
Oakland County Bar Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Oakland County Bar Foundation

The Oakland County Bar Foundation is dedicated to ensuring access to justice and an understanding of the law in our community.

$200k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$52k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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 2025.

Crime & Legal$1.3MHealth$45kPublic Benefit$40kEducation$20kEnvironment$20kYouth Development$11kHuman Services$11kEmployment$8k
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 8 grants below total $189,880, the rows itemized in this filing. The $199,880 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $10,000 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $14k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $124k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $52k
$20,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$2.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Lakeshore Legal Aid$52,250
Oakland County Bar Association$38,880
CARE House of Oakland County$25,000
Catholic Charities of Southeast Michigan$20,000
Oakland Mediation Center Inc$20,000
SW Detroit Immigrant & Refugee Center$20,000
Center for Civic Education$8,500
Legal Aid & Defender Association Inc$5,250
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 (FY18–20, $11k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $5k → 8%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $5k → 8%SOCIETY OF ACTIVE RETIREES: $500 → 8%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 8% of Oakland County Bar Foundation’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, 92%.

Oakland County Bar Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.3M · 13 repeat orgs$116k to everyone else

13 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
8

Total granted

$1.3M
$91k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+29%
+35%

Still filing today

100%
88%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’20’21’22’23’24’25
Crime & LegalHuman ServicesEducationPublic BenefitHealthPublic Safety & DisasterOther
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

  • LL
    Lakeshore Legal Aid
    8× · 2017–2025 · $445k · revenue +143%
  • OC
    Oakland County Bar Association
    8× · 2017–2025 · $272k · revenue +8%
  • SD
    Southwest Detroit Immigrant and Refugee Center
    7× · 2017–2025 · $155k · revenue +301%

Funded once

  • MICHIGAN COMMUNITY RESOURCES
    one grant, 2021 · $25k · revenue -53%
  • TR
    THE RESTORE FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2018 · $20k
  • TJ
    THE JOSEPH PROJECT INC
    one grant, 2024 · $15k · revenue -4%
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
Michigan Legal Services

Provide free legal assistance to indigent and low income persons

Crime & Legal
2
Michigan Advocacy Program

To advance the safety, independence, and economic stability of those most affected by poverty, racism, and other structurally oppressive systems by increasing access to justice and working for systemic solutions.

Crime & Legal
3
Legal Services of Northern Michigan

To be a public law firm that knows, as well as understands, the problems of even the poorest in our communities and addresses these problems through education, and with creative legal advocacy of the highest distinction. LSNM will be seen…

Crime & Legal
4
Legal Aid Chicago

At legal aid chicago, we work together to provide high quality civil legal aid to people living in poverty and other vulnerable groups.through advocacy, education, collaboration, and litigation we empower individuals, protect fundamental…

Crime & Legal
5
Elder Law of Michigan

To advocate for, educate, and assist our target populations. our services address the needs of many different people, but we continue to target our services to older adults and persons with disabilities.

Human Services
6
Legal Aid of Western Michigan

We protect rights, challenge injustice, and fight poverty through freelegal advocacy for people and families.

Crime & Legal
7
Legal Assistance Center

A legal self help center, the legal assistance center works to educate, empower, and equip the people of our community to face and resolve legal challenges, to assure access to justice, and to thereby enhance individual, family, and…

Crime & Legal
8
Laborers International Union of State of Mi

Collective bargaining and representation

—
9
Detroit Justice Center

The Detroit Justice Center works alongside communities to create economic opportunities, transform the justice system, and promote equitable and just cities.

Crime & Legal
10
Dispute Resolution Centers of Michigan Inc

Provide affordable or free mediation services and conflict resolution trainings to support the transforming of our society into a collaborative and problem-solving one.

Crime & Legal
11
Legal Aid Society of Birmingham

The Organization is a nonprofit community defender providing legal assistance through court appointment to children and other indigent persons.

Crime & Legal
12
Judicial Integrity Project

To improve Michigans judiciary through the evaluation, education promotion of judges committed to deciding cases based on the plain meaning of text stare decisis develop an education program for legislators general public to raise…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Michigan Community Resources; the most unlike its peers is White Lake Police Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

23 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. 23 of the 24 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
23/23
Grantees still filing
19/23
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Lakeshore Legal Aid: $444,750 · Crime & LegalLakeshore Legal AidSouthwest Detroit Immigrant and Refugee Center: $155,000 · Crime & LegalSouthwest Detroit Immigrant and Refugee CenterCAREHOUSE OF OAKLAND COUNTY INC: $130,000 · Crime & LegalCAREHOUSE OF OAKLAND COUNTY INC+6 more: $100,250 · Crime & Legal+6 moreOakland County Bar Association: $272,145 · OtherOakland County Bar AssociationLEGAL AID AND DEFENDER ASSOCIATION INC: $70,000 · OtherLEGAL AID AND DEFENDER ASSOCIATION INCThe Michigan Center for Civic Education: $51,500 · OtherThe Michigan Center for Civic Educatio…CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN: $50,000 · OtherCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF SOUTHEAST MICHIG…THE RESTORE FOUNDATION: $20,000 · Other+3 more: $35,374 · Other+3 moreBEAUMONT HEALTH FOUNDATION: $60,000 · HealthUNIVERSITY OF DETROIT MERCY: $35,000 · EducationWhite Lake Police Foundation: $20,500 · Public Safety & DisasterJEWISH FAMILY SERVICES INC: $5,000 · Human ServicesJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $5,000 · Human ServicesSOCIETY OF ACTIVE RETIREES: $500 · Human ServicesPATRIOT WEEK INC: $10,211 · Public Benefit
Crime & Legal$830,000Other$499,019Health$60,000Education$35,000Public Safety & Disaster$20,500Human Services$10,500Public Benefit$10,211

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetLakeshore Legal Aid: $444,750 over 8y, 0.6% of budgetOakland County Bar Association: $272,145 over 8y, 5.4% of budgetSouthwest Detroit Immigrant and Refugee Center: $155,000 over 7y, 8.4% of budgetCAREHOUSE OF OAKLAND COUNTY INC: $130,000 over 8y, 0.9% of budgetLEGAL AID AND DEFENDER ASSOCIATION INC: $70,000 over 5y, 2.7% of budgetBEAUMONT HEALTH FOUNDATION: $60,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetThe Michigan Center for Civic Education: $51,500 over 7y, 14% of budgetCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN: $50,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF DETROIT MERCY: $35,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMICHIGAN COMMUNITY RESOURCES: $25,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetTHE CHALDEAN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetTHE MAURICE & JANE SUGAR LAW CENTER FOR ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL JUSTICE: $15,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetTHE JOSEPH PROJECT INC: $15,000 over 1y, 5.3% of budgetTROY HISTORICAL SOCIETY: $10,920 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetIMMIGRATION LAW & JUSTICE MICHIGAN: $10,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetSTUDENT ADVOCACY CENTER OF MICHIGAN INC: $9,454 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY SERVICES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $5,000 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.

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.

Community Foundation …Michigan State Bar Fo…United Way for Southe…Butzel Long Charitabl…Ford PhilanthropyDTE Energy FoundationThe Kresge FoundationWK Kellogg FoundationJpmorgan Chase Founda…Network for GoodNational Philanthropi…The Bank of America C…
Community Foundation for Southeast MichiganMI24.7× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan · Michigan State Bar Foundation · United Way for Southeastern Michigan · Butzel Long Charitable Trust · Ford Philanthropy · DTE Energy Foundation · The Kresge Foundation · WK Kellogg Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Network for Good · National Philanthropic Trust · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc

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 Oakland County Bar Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Oakland County Bar Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's 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
    8report 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, 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 Oakland County Bar Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Oakland County Bar Foundation 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 24 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Oakland County Bar’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