Loading…
· Public charity
SAFE & JUST MICHIGAN
Advance policies that end mi's overuse of incarceration and promote community safety and healing.
$1.3M
Granted FY2024
3
Grants
2
Communities
$1.2M
Largest
01What you fund
0183% classified
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2018–2024.
Crime & Legal$1.8MCivil Rights$75kCommunity Improvement$25kOther$395k
02beneath the categories
Past the labels — and the year it shifted
Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.
…and in their own words, year by year
2021
clean slatelegal cleanslate outreachoutreach outreach
2022
—
2023
identify
2024
—
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2024 · 3 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k1 grant · $35k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $75k
- $250k+1 grant · $1.2M
$75,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
- NATION OUTSIDE$1,157,061
- AMERICAN FRIENDS SERVICE COMMITTEE$75,000
- MICHIGAN ADVOCACY PROGRAM$35,000
02The need
04
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:
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY18–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 20% — the area typically sits at 12%. 94% of your dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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 line in 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, United Way ALICE — 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.
86%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.9M · 3 repeat orgs$324k to everyone else
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +799% since the first grant, against +132% for the ones you funded once.
3 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
3
10
Total granted
$1.9M
$324k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+799%
+132%
Still filing today
67%
80%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
Crime & LegalCivil RightsCommunity ImprovementOther
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
- NONATION OUTSIDE2× · 2023–2024 · $1.5M · 100% of their budget
- AFAMERICAN FRIENDS SERVICE COMMITTEE5× · 2019–2024 · $325k
- MAMICHIGAN ADVOCACY PROGRAM4× · 2021–2024 · $151k · revenue +194%
Funded once
- MJMOTHERING JUSTICEgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $75k · revenue +712%
- MIMICHIGAN INDIAN LEGAL SERVICESgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $36k · revenue +86%
- LALEGAL AID OF WESTERN MICHIGANgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $36k · revenue +48%
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
Michigan Legal Services
Provide free legal assistance to indigent and low income persons
Crime & Legal
2
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
3
Economic Justice Alliance of Michigan
To advance economic justice in michigan
Public Benefit
4
Genesee County Legal Aid Society
To provide legal services for those unable to afford legal assistance
—
5
Maine Equal Justice Partners
Maine Equal Justice is a Nonprofit legal aid and economic justice organization working to increase economic security, opportunity, and equity for people in Maine.
Crime & Legal
6
Michigan Community Action Inc
To strengthen and inspire Community Action Agencies to champion solutions to poverty and to promote economic opportunity.
Community Improvement
7
The Michigan Center for Civic Education
To promote and support the development of engaged, responsible citizens. The Michigan Center for Civic Education (MCCE) strengthens constitutional democracy through authentic civic education and professional learning. MCCE advances the…
—
8
Action for Liberation
Michigan Liberation is dedicated to the leadership development of community members and creation of effective campaigns to advance racial, gender and economic justice in Michigan
Civil Rights
9
Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition
To end environmental injustice by empowering communities at the grassroots level.
Environment
10
Elder Law of Michigan
To advocate for, educate, and assist older adults and persons with disabilities.
Human Services
11
Michigan Association for Justice
To promote a fair and effective justice system we aim to support the work of attorneys in their efforts to ensure that any person who is injured by the misconduct or negligence of others can obtain justice in michigan's courtrooms, even…
—
12
Land Conservancy of West Michigan
The Land Conservancy of West Michigan exists to help people protect, enjoy and care for natural land in West Michigan.
Environment
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Legal Aid of Western Michigan and the most unlike its peers is Still Standing Inc. 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
13 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2024.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
12/13
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Crime & Legal$1,762,061Other$394,750Civil Rights$75,000Community Improvement$25,000
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 NATION OUTSIDE ↗
- Who funds MICHIGAN ADVOCACY PROGRAM ↗
- Who funds MOTHERING JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds MICHIGAN INDIAN LEGAL SERVICES ↗
- Who funds LEGAL AID OF WESTERN MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds LAKESHORE LEGAL AID ↗
- Who funds LEGAL SERVICES OF EASTERN MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds MICHIGAN FAITH IN ACTION ↗
- Who funds A BRIGHTER WAY ↗
- Who funds DETROIT JUSTICE CENTER ↗
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.
Michigan State Bar FoundationMI18.2× affinity6 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: Michigan State Bar Foundation · United Way for Southeastern Michigan · Community Foundation for Southeast · Legal Services Corporation · WK Kellogg Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift 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 organisation SAFE & JUST MICHIGAN 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
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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. 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.
05Through Plinth
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: NATION OUTSIDE.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
high risk
~2 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 2 filed years.
Track record & reputation
medium risk
2 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 9.0× since.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 923740015 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on NATION OUTSIDE, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- FlagFinancial stability— Roughly 2 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
- WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 100% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to Safe & Just Michigan?
Find your warmest path to Safe & Just Michigan through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines