Skip to content

· Private foundation

Schoonbeck Family Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$72k
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$7k
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 2025.

Human Services$216kHealth$122kAnimals$117kHousing & Shelter$117kReligion$54kEnvironment$45k
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$7,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$509k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HABITAT FOR HUMANITY$7,000
HUMANE SOCIETY$7,000
PAWS WITH A CAUSE$7,000
HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN$7,000
VISITING NURSE FOUNDATION$7,000
DA BLODGETT-ST JOHNS$7,000
MEL TROTTER MINISTRIES$6,000
DE'GAGE MINISTRIES$6,000
IN THE IMAGE$5,000
BLANDFORD NATURE CENTER$5,000
GUIDING LIGHT MISSION$5,000
MICHIGAN COMMUNITY BLOOD CTRS$3,000
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 (FY17–25, $180k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%PAWS WITH A CAUSE: $7k → 10%PAWS WITH A CAUSE: $7k → 10%PAWS WITH A CAUSE: $7k → 10%PAWS WITH A CAUSE: $7k → 10%PAWS WITH A CAUSE: $7k → 10%PAWS WITH A CAUSE: $7k → 10%PAWS WITH A CAUSE: $7k → 10%PAWS WITH A CAUSE: $7k → 10%PAWS WITH A CAUSE: $7k → 10%HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN: $7k → 11%HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN: $7k → 11%HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN: $7k → 11%HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN: $7k → 11%HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN: $7k → 11%HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN: $7k → 11%HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN: $7k → 11%HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN: $7k → 11%HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN: $7k → 11%DE'GAGE MINISTRIES: $6k → 11%DE'GAGE MINISTRIES: $6k → 11%DE'GAGE MINISTRIES: $6k → 11%DE'GAGE MINISTRIES: $6k → 11%DE'GAGE MINISTRIES: $6k → 11%DE'GAGE MINISTRIES: $6k → 11%DE'GAGE MINISTRIES: $6k → 11%DE'GAGE MINISTRIES: $6k → 11%DE'GAGE MINISTRIES: $6k → 11%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.
$671k · 13 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

13 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
0

Total granted

$671k
$0

Still filing today

69%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHousing & ShelterEducationOther
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

  • HO
    Hospice of Michigan Inc
    9× · 2017–2025 · $63k · revenue +46%
  • PW
    Paws With A Cause
    9× · 2017–2025 · $63k · revenue +86%
  • HF
    HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
    9× · 2017–2025 · $63k · revenue +69%

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
    Land Conservancy of West Michigan

    Our mission is conserving West Michigans ecologically critical land. We protect land by creating public nature preserves, providing support to communities and local governments in creating natural areas, and helping private landowners…

    Environment
    2
    Habitat for Humanity of Lapeer - Tuscola

    To eliminate sub-standard housing and homelessness from lapeer county.

    —
    3
    Benton Habitat for Humanity

    Benton habitat for humanity is a countywide ecumenical ministry that seeks to eliminate substandard housing and to make decent shelter a matter of action and conscience by having people from all income levels work together.

    —
    4
    Lakeshore Legal Aid

    Standing with our neighbors, Lakeshore Legal Aid fights poverty and injustice through advocacy and by providing meaningful and dignified access to the legal system.

    Crime & Legal
    5
    Lake Michigan Bird Observatory

    Bird research and conservation in the western lake michigan region of the united states.

    —
    6
    Humane Society of Southwestern Michigan

    Humane society of southwestern michigan exists to provide shelter and care for sick, homeless and unwanted animals. in addition, the organization provides adoption services for the animals in its care.

    Animals
    7
    Habitat for Humanity of Michigan Inc

    Our mission is to assist our affiliates to increase capacity to build simple decent homes in partnership with people in need in the State of Michigan.

    Housing & Shelter
    8
    Paws of Grays Harbor

    PAWS cares for lost, abandoned and abused animals and finds them new homes with responsible owners. PAWS also provides low cost spay and neuter services, a pet food pantry, and community education. During 2024 PAWS adopted out 577 pets.…

    Animals
    9
    Gw Homeless Services of Northern Michigan Inc

    The mission of gw homeless services of northern michigan, inc is to provide safe, supportive shelter to individuals experiencing homelessness.the 2023 990 was for 10/1-12/31/23 due to an accounting period change.

    Human Services
    10
    Liberty Wildlife Inc

    Liberty Wildlife nurtures the nature of Arizona by providing quality wildlife rehabilitation, environmental education and conservation consultation services for the community.

    —
    11
    Danbury Animal Welfare Society

    Danbury animal welfare society , inc.(daws) is a non-profit organization dedicated to improving the lives of animals in our community and beyond. we promote responsible pet guardianship and the humane treatment of animals, and work toward…

    Animals
    12
    Habitat for Humanity of Northwest Metro Atlanta Inc

    Habitat for humanity of northwest metro atlanta, inc. is an affiliate of the americus-based habitat for humanity international. habitat for humanity of northwest metro atlanta, inc. is an ecumenical, christian housing ministry dedicated to…

    —
    How this is measured
    The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Degage Ministries; the most unlike its peers is Wildlife Rehab Center Ltd. 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

    10 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. 10 of the 13 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.

    1
    Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
    4
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    9/10
    Grantees still filing
    8/10
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    HUMANE SOCIETY: $63,000 · OtherHUMANE SOCIETYDA BLODGETT - ST JOHN'S: $63,000 · OtherDA BLODGETT - ST JOHN'SMEL TROTTER MINISTRIES: $54,000 · OtherMEL TROTTER MINISTRIESWILDLIFE REHAB CENTER LTD: $54,000 · OtherWILDLIFE REHAB CENTER LTDMATTHEW 2540 HEARTSIDE INC: $45,000 · OtherMATTHEW 2540 HEARTSIDE INCGUIDING LIGHT MISSION INC: $45,000 · OtherGUIDING LIGHT MISSION INCVISITING NURSES FOUNDATION: $31,500 · OtherVISITING NURSES FOUNDATIONMICHIGAN COMMUNITY BLOOD CTRS: $27,000 · OtherMICHIGAN COMMUNITY BLOOD CTRSHospice of Michigan Inc: $63,000 · Human ServicesHospice of Michigan IncPaws With A Cause: $63,000 · Human ServicesPaws With A CauseDEGAGE MINISTRIES: $54,000 · Human ServicesDEGAGE MINISTRIESHABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $63,000 · Housing & ShelterHABITAT FO…BLANDFORD NATURE CENTER: $45,000 · Education
    Other$382,500Human Services$180,000Housing & Shelter$63,000Education$45,000

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

    25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetHospice of Michigan Inc: $63,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetDA BLODGETT - ST JOHN'S: $63,000 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetPaws With A Cause: $63,000 over 9y, 0.2% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $63,000 over 9y, 3.2% of budgetMEL TROTTER MINISTRIES: $54,000 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetDEGAGE MINISTRIES: $54,000 over 9y, 0.2% of budgetWILDLIFE REHAB CENTER LTD: $54,000 over 6y, 47% of budgetMATTHEW 2540 HEARTSIDE INC: $45,000 over 9y, 1.1% of budgetGUIDING LIGHT MISSION INC: $45,000 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetBLANDFORD NATURE CENTER: $45,000 over 9y, 0.3% 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 Hospice of Michigan Inc ↗
    • Who funds DA BLODGETT - ST JOHN'S ↗
    • Who funds Paws With A Cause ↗
    • Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ↗
    • Who funds MEL TROTTER MINISTRIES ↗
    • Who funds DEGAGE MINISTRIES ↗
    • Who funds WILDLIFE REHAB CENTER LTD ↗
    • Who funds MATTHEW 2540 HEARTSIDE INC ↗
    • Who funds GUIDING LIGHT MISSION INC ↗
    • Who funds BLANDFORD NATURE CENTER ↗

    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.

    Grand Rapids Community FoundationMI17.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: Grand Rapids Community Foundation · Peter C & Emajean Cook Foundation · John Dykema & Michele Maly-Dykema Family Foundation · The Sebastian Foundation · The Korff Foundation · Cdv5 Foundation · The Meijer Foundation · Dick and Betsy Devos Family Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust

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

    2023
    ’20’21’22’23’24’25
    no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
      no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
      0get no government money at all
      2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
      0rely on government for over half their income
      ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
      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.

      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 13 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-PF 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 Schoonbeck Family’s filings →

      More from the funding graph