Skip to content
Southeastern Michigan Chapter NECA Education and Research Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Southeastern Michigan Chapter NECA Education and Research 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.

$176k
Granted FY2025still arriving
18
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$20k
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, FY2020 to 2025.

Education$442kHealth$5k
02FY2025 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k10 grants · $60k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $116k
$9,890
Median grant
4
States reached
$623k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Oakland University$19,953
Lawrence Technological University$18,500
Central Michigan University$18,000
Michigan Technological University$14,000
Kettering University$12,000
University of Detroit Mercy$11,500
Michigan State University$11,500
Grand Valley State University$10,500
University of Michigan Dearborn$9,890
Walsh College$7,859
Louisiana State University$7,000
Ferris State University$7,000
Hope College$7,000
The University of Tampa$7,000
Wayne State University$6,000
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 (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 74% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%Capella University: $3k → 11%The University of Tampa: $7k → 13%Macomb Community College: $5k → 10%Hope College: $7k → 10%Northern Michigan University: $7k → 11%University of Michigan: $4k → 14%Saginaw Valley State: $10k → 14%Michigan Technological University: $17k → 14%Michigan State University: $12k → 16%Kettering University: $12k → 16%Central Michigan University: $18k → 19%Ferris State University: $10k → 20%Wayne State University: $6k → 21%UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA: $4k → 17%Louisiana State University: $7k → 19%Walsh College: $8k → 8%SAGINAW VALLEY STATE UNIVERSITY: $10k → 14%Michigan Technological University: $14k → 14%Michigan State University: $10k → 16%Kettering University: $10k → 16%Central Michigan Unversity: $8k → 19%Ferris State University: $7k → 20%Wayne State University: $5k → 21%Walsh College: $7k → 8%Saginaw Valley State: $3k → 14%Michigan Tech University: $14k → 14%MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY: $4k → 16%Kettering University: $10k → 16%CENTRAL MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY: $5k → 19%Ferris State University: $7k → 20%Wayne State University: $3k → 21%Lawrence Technological University: $19k → 8%Eastern Michigan University: $4k → 14%Michigan Tech University: $10k → 14%Kettering University: $7k → 16%Central Michigan Unversity: $4k → 19%Ferris State University: $4k → 20%University of Detroit Mercy: $12k → 21%Lawrence Technological University: $12k → 8%Michigan Tech University: $5k → 14%FERRIS STATE UNIVERSITY: $4k → 20%University of Detroit Mercy: $6k → 21%Lawrence Technological University: $6k → 8%University of Detroit Mercy: $5k → 21%Lawrence Technological University: $5k → 8%University of Michigan Dearborn: $10k → 21%University of Michigan Dearborn: $10k → 21%Oakland University: $20k → 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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$393k · 17 repeat orgs$53k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +19% since the first grant, against +11% for those funded once.

17 repeat relationships: 14 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
8

Total granted

$393k
$28k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+19%
+11%

Still filing today

29%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k went to new ones.

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

  • LT
    LAWRENCE TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY
    4× · 2022–2025 · $42k · revenue +19%
  • KU
    Kettering University
    4× · 2021–2025 · $39k · revenue +19%
  • UNIVERSITY OF DETROIT MERCY
    3× · 2023–2025 · $23k · revenue +9%

Funded once

  • SV
    SAGINAW VALLEY STATE UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2020 · $10k
  • EM
    Eastern Michigan University
    one grant, 2024 · $4k
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA
    one grant, 2020 · $4k
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
Walsh University Inc

Walsh university is an independent, coeducational catholic, liberal arts and sciences institution dedicated to educating its students to become leaders in service to others through a values-based education with an international perspective…

Education
2
Excelsior University

Excelsior University provides educational opportunity to adult learners with an emphasis on those historically underrepresented in higher education. The University meets students where they are - academically and geographically, offering…

Education
3
Benedictine University

Benedictine University is an inclusive academic community dedicated to teaching and learning, scholarship and service, truth and justice, as inspired by the Catholic intellectual tradition, the social teaching of the Church, and the…

Education
4
Roger Williams University

At Roger Williams University, students are prepared to be thinkers and doers ready to solve challenging problems with innovative solutions. RWU offers robust offerings of undergraduate, graduate and professional programs across eight…

Education
5
Mercyhurst University

Rooted in our Mercy Catholic liberal arts identity, we educate and inspire diverse learners in an environment where faith and reason flourish together for meaningful lives, dignified work, and leadership in service toward a just and loving…

Education
6
Franklin University

Since 1902, Franklin University has been a pioneer in meeting the needs of adult students who have the ambition to continue their education in combination with other responsibilities, receiving its status as a tax exempt organization in…

—
7
Roberts Wesleyan University

As new york's leading university for character education, rwu is a community of learners committed to historic christianity which seeks to prepare thoughtful, spiritually mature, service-oriented people who will transform society.

Education
8
Lehigh University

The university's goal in the coming decade is to advance learning through the integration of teaching, research and service to others. the core of this goal is to prepare graduates to engage with the world and lead lives of meaning. to do…

Education
9
Loyola University

Loyola University New Orleans, a Jesuit and Catholic institution of higher education, welcomes students of diverse backgrounds and prepares them to lead meaningful lives with and for others; to pursue truth, wisdom, and virtue; and to work…

Education
10
Regent University

Regent University serves as a center of Christian thought and action to provide excellent education through a Biblical perspective and global context equipping Christian leaders to change the world.

—
11
Trinity University

Trinity university is an independent co-educational university whose mission is excellence in the interrelated areas of teaching, research and services.

Education
12
Otterbein University

Otterbein University is an inclusive community dedicated to educating the whole person in the context of humane values. Our mission is to prepare graduates to think deeply and broadly, to engage locally and globally, and to advance their…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The University of Tampa Incorporated; the most unlike its peers is University of Michigan. 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

9 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. 9 of the 29 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
7/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CENTRAL MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY: $34,500 · OtherCENTRAL MICHIGAN UNIVERSITYFERRIS STATE UNIVERSITY: $34,000 · OtherFERRIS STATE UNIVERSITYMICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY: $32,300 · OtherMICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITYMichigan Technological University: $30,500 · OtherMichigan Technological UniversityMichigan Tech University: $29,000 · OtherMichigan Tech UniversityUniversity of Michigan Dearborn: $23,390 · OtherUniversity of Michigan DearbornOAKLAND UNIVERSITY: $21,453 · OtherOAKLAND UNIVERSITYGRAND VALLEY STATE UNIVERSITY: $18,500 · OtherGRAND VALLEY STATE UNIVERSITYIndividual grant recipient: $14,500 · OtherWayne State University: $13,500 · OtherNORTHERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY: $11,000 · Other+11 more: $50,742 · Other+11 moreLAWRENCE TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY: $41,500 · EducationLAWRENCE TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITYKettering University: $39,000 · EducationKettering UniversityUNIVERSITY OF DETROIT MERCY: $22,500 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF DETROIT MERCYWalsh College of Accountancy & Business Administration: $14,718 · EducationWalsh College of Accountancy & Bu…The University of Tampa Incorporated: $7,000 · EducationHOPE COLLEGE: $7,000 · Education+1 more: $1,500 · Education
Other$313,385Education$133,218

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 budgetLAWRENCE TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY: $41,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetKettering University: $39,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF DETROIT MERCY: $22,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetWalsh College of Accountancy & Business Administration: $14,718 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetThe University of Tampa Incorporated: $7,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHOPE COLLEGE: $7,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Michigan: $4,500 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetRochester Christian University: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH: $1,500 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.

  • Who funds LAWRENCE TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds Kettering University ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF DETROIT MERCY ↗
  • Who funds Walsh College of Accountancy & Business Administration ↗
  • Who funds The University of Tampa Incorporated ↗
  • Who funds HOPE COLLEGE ↗
  • Who funds University of Michigan ↗
  • Who funds Rochester Christian University ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH ↗

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.

Consumers Energy Foun…Community Foundation …Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Consumers Energy FoundationMI14× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Consumers Energy Foundation · Community Foundation for Southeast · 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 Southeastern Michigan Chapter NECA Education and Research Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Southeastern Michigan Chapter NECA Education and Research Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • The University of Tampa Incorporated: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
1report 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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Southeastern Michigan Chapter NECA Education and Research Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Southeastern Michigan Chapter NECA Education and Research 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 29 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 Southeastern Michigan Chapter NECA Education and Research’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