Skip to content
Shirley K Schlafer Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Shirley K Schlafer Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$314k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$194k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

Health$7.2MArts & Culture$523kScience & Tech$325kYouth Development$130kEnvironment$102kHuman Services$102kPublic Safety & Disaster$50kEducation$30kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $20k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $294k
$50,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN$193,500
PLANNED PARENTHOOD$50,000
NORTH STAR REACH$50,000
CRANBROOK SCHOOLS$10,000
MUSEUM OF CONTEMPORARY ART DETROIT$10,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 96% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%NATIONAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $10k → 17%WORLD WILDLIFE FUND: $10k → 14%NORTH STAR REACH: $60k → 5%CRANBROOK SCHOOLS: $10k → 8%ANN ARBOR ART CENTER: $25k → 14%MICHIGAN OPERA THEATRE: $25k → 21%WILD FOUNDATION: $25k → 12%DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS: $25k → 17%NORTH STAR REACH: $50k → 5%CRANBROOK SCHOOLS: $10k → 8%ANN ARBOR ART CENTER: $10k → 14%PEWABIC POTTERY SOCIETY: $25k → 21%WILD FOUNDATION: $20k → 12%NORTH STAR REACH: $20k → 5%CRANBROOK SCHOOLS: $10k → 8%WILD FOUNDATION: $16k → 12%WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN: $50k → 14%CRANBROOK SCHOOLS: $10k → 8%UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $1.6M → 14%WILD FOUNDATION: $15k → 12%NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY: $125k → 14%CRANBROOK SCHOOLS: $10k → 8%UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $1.5M → 14%NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY: $50k → 14%CRANBROOK SCHOOLS: $10k → 8%UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $1.4M → 14%NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY: $50k → 14%CRANBROOK SCHOOLS: $10k → 8%UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $1.3M → 14%NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY: $50k → 14%CRANBROOK SCHOOLS: $10k → 8%UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $240k → 14%RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES OF SOUTHEASTERN MICHIGAN: $100k → 21%NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY: $25k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $200k → 14%MUSEUM OF CONTEMPORARY ART DETROIT: $50k → 21%NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY: $25k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $194k → 14%MUSEUM OF CONTEMPORARY ART DETROIT: $50k → 21%UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $90k → 14%MUSEUM OF CONTEMPORARY ART DETROIT: $50k → 21%UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $50k → 14%MUSEUM OF CONTEMPORARY ART DETROIT: $50k → 21%UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $50k → 14%MUSEUM OF CONTEMPORARY ART DETROIT: $50k → 21%MUSEUM OF CONTEMPORARY ART DETROIT: $50k → 21%MUSEUM OF CONTEMPORARY ART DETROIT: $50k → 21%MUSEUM OF CONTEMPORARY ART DETROIT: $15k → 21%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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$8.4M · 12 repeat orgs$133k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +16% since the first grant, against -15% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
10

Total granted

$8.4M
$133k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+16%
-15%

Still filing today

67%
90%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Arts & CultureEnvironmentInternationalEducationAnimalsYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • UO
    University of Michigan
    8× · 2018–2025 · $6.7M · revenue +195% · 95% of their budget
  • NG
    NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY
    6× · 2018–2024 · $325k · revenue +60%
  • NS
    NORTH STAR REACH
    3× · 2023–2025 · $130k · revenue +4%

Funded once

  • WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC
    one grant, 2022 · $50k · revenue -40%
  • MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC
    one grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue +13%
  • DO
    DETROIT OPERA
    one grant, 2018 · $25k · revenue +23%
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
American Water Works Association

To promote public health, safety, and welfare through the improvement of the quality and quantity of drinking water and the development and furtherance of understanding of the problems relating thereto.

Public Benefit
2
National Association of Clean Water Agencies

Nacwa is the national voice of public clean water utilities, shaping water policy, convening a vibrant peer network, and empowering water leaders.

—
3
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
4
Detroiters Working for Environmental Justice

The organization is known as the leader in the movement and is seen as the "go to" experts on environmental justice and sustainable redevelopment because of its knowledge and its network.

Health
5
Institute for Agriculture & Trade Policy

Iatp works locally and globally at the intersection of policy and practice to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.

Food & Nutrition
6
International Center for Living Aquatic Resources Management Inc I

To end hunger and advance sustainable development by 2030 through science and innovation to transform food, land and water systems with aquatic foods for healthier people and planet.

—
7
Ocean Conservancy

Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.

Environment
8
The Water Research Foundation

The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…

Environment
9
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Foundation

To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.

Animals
10
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
11
Michigan Enviromental Council

Informing and educating the public and decision makers about environmental issues.

Environment
12
Friends of the Earth

Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Medecins Sans Frontieres Usa Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Rolling Dog Farm. 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

17 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. 17 of the 22 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
9/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

University of Michigan: $6,711,750 · OtherUniversity of MichiganPLANNED PARENTHOOD: $461,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD+8 more: $401,900 · OtherMUSEUM OF CONTEMPORARY ART DETROIT: $375,000 · Arts & CultureAnn Arbor Art Association: $38,940 · Arts & CultureDETROIT OPERA: $25,000 · Arts & CultureNATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY: $325,000 · EducationNORTH STAR REACH: $130,000 · Youth DevelopmentWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $50,000 · InternationalMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $25,000 · International+1 more: $1,000 · InternationalWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $15,000 · EnvironmentNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $10,000 · EnvironmentCLEAN WATER FUND: $1,000 · EnvironmentGLEANERS COMMUNITY FOOD BANK OF SOUTHEASTERN MICHIGAN: $10,000 · Food & Nutrition
Other$7,574,650Arts & Culture$438,940Education$325,000Youth Development$130,000International$76,000Environment$26,000Food & Nutrition$10,000

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 budgetUniversity of Michigan: $6,711,750 over 8y, 95% of budgetMUSEUM OF CONTEMPORARY ART DETROIT: $375,000 over 8y, 3.8% of budgetNATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY: $325,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetNORTH STAR REACH: $130,000 over 3y, 8.2% of budgetRONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES DET: $101,000 over 2y, 5.1% of budgetINTERNATIONAL WILDERNESS LEADERSHIP FOUNDATION INC: $76,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAnn Arbor Art Association: $38,940 over 4y, 1.4% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDETROIT OPERA: $25,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $15,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ROLLING DOG FARM: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetAARP FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWORLD ASSISTANCE FOR CAMBODIA INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCLEAN WATER FUND: $1,000 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 …The Pfizer Foundation…Network for GoodNational Philanthropi…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Community Foundation for Southeast MichiganMI13.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Network for Good · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 22 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 Shirley K Schlafer’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