Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Carl a Lemcool Memorial Foundation Inc

TO SUPPORT CHARITABLE, SCIENTIFIC, LITERARY AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES, BY MAKING GIFTS, GRANTS AND DISTRIBUTIONS REQUIRED IN THE BYLAWS OF THE EXCHANGE CLUB OF TRAVERSE CITY.

$60k
Granted FY2024still arriving
5
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$38k
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, FY2018 to 2024.

Human Services$129kEnvironment$60kRecreation & Sports$47kYouth Development$23kCrime & Legal$20kEducation$14kFood & Nutrition$10k
02FY2024 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k4 grants · $22k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $38k
$5,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$38,000
GRAND TRAVERSE AREA VETERANS COALITION$8,000
PROJECT FEED THE KIDS$5,000
CENTRAL UNITED METHODIST CHURCH COMMUNITY OUTREACH$5,000
TCAPS - STUDENT SUPPORT NETWORK$4,000
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 (FY21–21, $38k) 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%SINGLE MOMM: $38k → 10%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 29% of The Carl a Lemcool Memorial Foundation Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 100% of the giving stays in MI; by stated purpose, 71%.

The Carl a Lemcool Memorial Foundation Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

26%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$80k · 3 repeat orgs$223k to everyone else

3 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
9

Total granted

$80k
$163k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+20%
+52%

Still filing today

33%
56%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $60k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’21’22’23’24
HealthPublic BenefitHuman ServicesFood & NutritionOther
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

  • GT
    GRAND TRAVERSE CONSERVATION DISTRICT
    2× · 2021–2022 · $50k
  • TB
    TRAVERSE BAY CHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER
    2× · 2018–2022 · $20k · revenue +20%
  • TS
    TCAPS STEP PROGRAM
    2× · 2021–2022 · $10k

Funded once

  • MP
    MICHAEL'S PLACEgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue +52%
  • SM
    SINGLE MOMMgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $38k · revenue +156%
  • BB
    BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF NORTHWE
    one grant, 2023 · $23k · revenue 0%
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
05the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 17 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
5/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GRAND TRAVERSE CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $50,000 · OtherGRAND TRAVERSE CONSERVATION DISTRICTIndividual grant recipient: $38,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF NORTHWE: $23,000 · OtherBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF NORTHWETRAVERSE BAY CHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER: $20,000 · OtherTRAVERSE BAY CHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTERCHILD & FAMILY SERVICES: $12,000 · OtherCHILD & FAMILY SERVICESCHILD & FAMILY SERVICES OF NORTHWESTERN MICHIGAN INC: $11,341 · OtherCHILD & FAMILY SERVICES OF NORTHWESTERN MICHIGAN INCTCAPS STEP PROGRAM: $10,000 · OtherBOARDMAN RIVER CLEAN SWEEP: $10,000 · OtherGRAND TRAVERSE AREA VETERANS COALITION: $8,000 · Other+4 more: $18,152 · Other+4 moreMICHAEL'S PLACE: $50,000 · HealthMICHAEL'S PLACESINGLE MOMM: $37,525 · Human ServicesSINGLE MOMMVETERANS IN CRISIS: $10,000 · Public BenefitPROJECT FEED THE KIDS INC: $5,000 · Food & Nutrition
Other$200,493Health$50,000Human Services$37,525Public Benefit$10,000Food & Nutrition$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMICHAEL'S PLACE: $50,000 over 1y, 8.4% of budgetSINGLE MOMM: $37,525 over 1y, 4.6% of budgetBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF NORTHWE: $23,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetTRAVERSE BAY CHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER: $20,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetCHILD & FAMILY SERVICES OF NORTHWESTERN MICHIGAN INC: $11,341 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetVETERANS IN CRISIS: $10,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetPROJECT FEED THE KIDS INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.8% 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 MICHAEL'S PLACE ↗
  • Who funds SINGLE MOMM ↗
  • Who funds BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF NORTHWE ↗
  • Who funds TRAVERSE BAY CHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER ↗
  • Who funds CHILD & FAMILY SERVICES OF NORTHWESTERN MICHIGAN INC ↗
  • Who funds VETERANS IN CRISIS ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT FEED THE KIDS INC ↗

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 Traverse Regional Community FoundationMI22× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Grand Traverse Regional Community Foundation · The Broad Family Foundation · The Art and Mary Schmuckal Family Foundation · Oleson Foundation · Canton Community Foundation Inc · Consumers Energy Foundation · Impact 100 of Traverse City Inc · Kegley Family Foundation · Les & Ann Biederman Foundation Inc · Rotary Charities of Traverse City · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America

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 The Carl a Lemcool Memorial Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Carl a Lemcool Memorial Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%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 · 0–20%
    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 17 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Carl a Lemcool Memorial’s filings →

    More from the funding graph