· Public charity
Progress Michigan Inc
The organization's mission is to provide a strong, credible voice that holds public officials and government accountable; assists in the promotion of progressive ideas and uses state-of-the-art web-based news media to creatively build grassroots support for progressive ideas.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 6 grants below total $1,615,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $3,387,980 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $1,772,980 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
- $50k–250k4 grants · $390k
- $250k+2 grants · $1.2M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Progress Michigan Education | $825,000 |
| Michigan Civic Action Fund | $400,000 |
| Planned Parenthood advocates of Mic | $100,000 |
| Detroit Action | $100,000 |
| Michigan Liberation | $100,000 |
| Forward Michigan | $90,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY19–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 80% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +76% since the first grant, against +10% for the ones you funded once.
5 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 57% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $690k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- PMPROGRESS MICHIGAN POLITICAL2× · 2021–2022 · $1.6M
- PMProgress Michigan Education Inc3× · 2019–2024 · $1.1M · revenue +76%
- TATIDES ADVOCACY3× · 2020–2024 · $686k · revenue -40%
Funded once
- WTWe The People Action Fundone grant, 2021 · $840k · revenue +9% · 41% of their budget
- MLMICHIGAN LEAGUEone grant, 2021 · $128k
- CFCenter for Change A Northern MI Advone grant, 2023 · $100k · revenue -81% · 32% of their budget
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
Michigan Rising Action is focused on holding special interest networks accountable and advancing conservative principles. We're fighting for limited government, lowering taxes, fighting government over-regulation that stifles freedom, free…
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.
Voter education around policy
Social welfare and issue advocacy
The league's mission is to promote racial equity, economic security, health, and well being for all people in michigan through policy change.
To operate exclusively for the promotion of civic action and social welfare by promoting the common good and general welfare of the residents of and visitors to the State of Michigan; to support public policies on the Federal State and…
Prosperity michigan is the nonpartisan voice advocating for economic growth and opportunity for all michiganders, we make a pro-opportunity agenda front and center with elected officials, candidates, and voters by mobilizing citizens as a…
To empower students in Michigan's higher education institutions to take leadership in their community and increase their participation in the democratic process. We strengthen students' voices in developing and advocating for legislation…
To operate exclusively for the promotion of civic action and social welfare by promoting the common good and general welfare of the residents of, and visitors to, the State of Michigan; To support public policies on the federal, state, and…
Arab Americans for Progress is a Michigan-based 501c4 organization working to build a just, equitable and democratic society where the highest purpose of government is to serve the needs of all its people.
To organize, train, and educate communities throughout Michigan to promote racial and economic justice; facilitate relationships between community leaders from rural, suburban, and urban communities across Michigan and strengthen…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Michigan Civic Action Fund and the most unlike its peers is Liberation Policy Action Cente. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
20 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 20 of the 27 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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 Progress Michigan Education Inc ↗
- Who funds We The People Action Fund ↗
- Who funds TIDES ADVOCACY ↗
- Who funds PROGRESS NOW INC ↗
- Who funds MICHIGAN CIVIC ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds Center for Change A Northern MI Adv ↗
- Who funds MI PODER ↗
- Who funds MICHIGAN LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD ADVOCATES OF MI ↗
- Who funds Emgage Action Inc ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds ACTION FOR LIBERATION ↗
- Who funds FORWARD MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds PONTIAC POLICY ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds Emgage Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds CLEAN WATER ACTION ↗
- Who funds LIBERATION POLICY ACTION CENTE ↗
- Who funds WORKING AMERICA ↗
- Who funds MOTHERING JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds LGBT Detroit ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Michigan Civic Action Fund · Tides Advocacy · America Votes · Sixteen Thirty Fund · Tides Foundation · State Engagement Fund · For Our Future Action Fund · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · Open Society Action Fund Inc · Michigan Voices · Pro-Democracy Campaign · NEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc
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 Progress Michigan 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Progress Michigan Inc?
Find your warmest path to Progress Michigan 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.