Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Chelsea Health and Wellness Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$463k
Granted FY2025still arriving
40
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$126k
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.

Health$1.3MFood & Nutrition$750kRecreation & Sports$485kEducation$433kHuman Services$285kArts & Culture$120kEnvironment$61kCivil Rights$49kOther$0
02FY2025 · 40 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k32 grants · $90k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $114k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $259k
$3,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$25M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MANCHESTER COMMUNITY SCHOOLS$125,679
ST JOSEPH MERCY CHELSEA$75,000
5 HEALTHY TOWNS FOUNDATION$58,471
CHELSEA WELLNESS CENTER$49,263
GRASS LAKE SENIOR CENTER$26,450
DEXTER WELLNESS CENTER$18,046
MANCHESTER AREA SENIOR CITIZENS COUNC$10,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
STOCKBRIDGE AREA SENIOR CENTER$8,000
MAIN STREET PARK ALLIANCE$7,500
CITY OF CHELSEA$6,825
GRASS LAKE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH$6,250
STOCKBRIDGE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS$5,800
GRASS LAKE FARMERS MARKET$5,750
DEXTER WINTER FARMERS MARKET$5,615
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, $185k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%GRASS LAKE SENIOR CENTER: $26k → 13%GRASS LAKE SENIOR CENTER: $20k → 13%GRASS LAKE SENIOR CENTER: $16k → 13%GRASS LAKE SENIOR CENTER: $15k → 13%GRASS LAKE SENIOR CENTER: $15k → 13%WESTERN-WASHTENAW AREA VALUE EXPRESS: $5k → 14%GRASS LAKE SENIOR CENTER: $1k → 13%JACKSON YMCA: $500 → 13%JACKSON YMCA: $500 → 13%CHELSEA SENIOR CENTER: $34k → 14%CHELSEA SENIOR CENTER: $17k → 14%CHELSEA SENIOR CENTER: $11k → 14%CHELSEA SENIOR CENTER: $11k → 14%CHELSEA SENIOR CENTER: $10k → 14%CHELSEA SENIOR CENTER: $3k → 14%JACKSON YMCA: $500 → 14%CHELSEA SENIOR CENTER: $500 → 14%CHELSEA SENIOR CENTER: $200 → 14%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 5% of The Chelsea Health and Wellness Foundation’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, 83%.

The Chelsea Health and Wellness Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 16% directed abroad (not shown)
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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.5M · 52 repeat orgs$148k to everyone else

52 repeat relationships: 29 still active in FY2025, 23 since wound down; 11 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

52
32

Total granted

$3.5M
$105k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+24%
+32%

Still filing today

29%
34%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $43k 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
HealthHuman ServicesRecreation & SportsFood & NutritionYouth DevelopmentEnvironmentOther
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

  • SJ
    ST JOSEPH MERCY CHELSEA INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $663k · revenue +29%
  • TH
    TRINITY HEALTH - MICHIGAN
    8× · 2018–2025 · $165k · revenue +28%
  • GL
    GRASS LAKE SENIOR CENTER
    6× · 2020–2025 · $94k · revenue +98%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $22k
  • PM
    Potawatomi Mountain Bike Associationgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $17k · revenue +271% · 39% of their budget
  • CC
    CHELSEA CHILDRENS COOPERATIVE INC
    one grant, 2020 · $12k · revenue +21%
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
Chippewa Watershed Conservancy Inc

To protect and restore central michigan's land, water, and wildlife resources to improve the quality of life for all.

Environment
2
Chelsea Rod & Gun Club of Chelsea Michigan

The Chelsea Rod and Gun Club of Chelsea, Michigan is organized for the purposes of propagating fish and wildlife in the vicinity of Chelsea, Michigan, for leasing and maintaining lands for hunting, and for carrying on conservation and…

Education
3
Michigan Chamber of Commerce

To promote conditions favorable to job creation and business success in michigan.

—
4
Midland County Council On Aging

Our mission is to promote and enrich quality of life for older adults and those who care for them by collaboratively providing meaningful services and opportunities.

Human Services
5
Cheboygan County Council On Aging

Provides information and services for senior citizens of cheboygan county.

Human Services
6
Chelsea Hockey Association

To foster, promote and teach amateur hockey in Chelsea, MI and surrounding areas.

Recreation & Sports
7
Chelsea United Way

The purpose of Chelsea United Way shall be to raise funds in the community to assist local agencies to maintain the health and welfare of members of the community of Chelsea.

—
8
Harbor Country Chamber of Commerce

To promote business and economic development for eight towns in southwest michigan.

—
9
Land Information Access Association

Liaa is a community service organization working to increase the sustainability of communities and expand civic engagement. our mission statement is: helping people to shape better communities through: participation, education, information…

Environment
10
Michigan Recreation & Park Association

A member driven organization committed to providing quality professional park and recreation programs and services with fiscal integrity and progressive leadership to michigans recreation and parks trade.

—
11
Chelsea Chamber of Commerce

We support, promote, and inform our business and non-profit members, as well as chelsea in general, for a stronger, more productive, and cohesive community. we are a non-profit, member-supported organization.

—
12
Area Agency On Aging of Western Michigan Inc

Through internal expertise, external partnerships, and advocacy, the area agency on aging of western michigan provides older adults, adults with disabilities, and their caregivers equitable access to services that promote independence and…

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Webster Township Historical Society; the most unlike its peers is St Louis Center. 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

33 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. 33 of the 95 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
11
Early backer (in before they grew)
31/33
Grantees still filing
24/33
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MANCHESTER COMMUNITY SCHOOLS: $462,613 · OtherMANCHESTER COMMUNITY SCHOOLS5 HEALTHY TOWNS FOUNDATION: $169,216 · Other5 HEALTHY TOWNS FOUNDATIONCHELSEA WELLNESS CENTER: $163,994 · OtherCHELSEA WELLNESS CENTERIndividual grant recipient: $151,798 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $139,340 · OtherIndividual grant recipientGRASS LAKE CHARTER TOWNSHIP: $85,695 · OtherDEXTER WELLNESS CENTER: $84,725 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $82,500 · Other+67 more: $796,999 · Other+67 moreST JOSEPH MERCY CHELSEA INC: $663,276 · HealthST JOSEPH MERCY CHELSEA IN…TRINITY HEALTH - MICHIGAN: $164,883 · HealthTRINITY HEALTH - MICHIGAN+3 more: $27,745 · HealthGrass Lake Farmers Market: $205,119 · Food & NutritionGrass Lake…ACORN FARMERS MARKET AND CAFE: $106,405 · Food & NutritionACORN FARM…OPEN AIR MARKET OF STOCKBRIDGE: $23,405 · Food & NutritionOPEN AIR M…GRASS LAKE SENIOR CENTER: $93,595 · Human ServicesCHELSEA SENIOR CENTER: $85,270 · Human ServicesFAITH IN ACTION INC: $7,400 · Human Services+2 more: $6,500 · Human ServicesHURON WATERLOO PATHWAYS INITIATIVE: $92,457 · Environment+1 more: $500 · EnvironmentPotawatomi Mountain Bike Association: $17,136 · Recreation & SportsMAIN STREET PARK ALLIANCE: $7,500 · Recreation & Sports+2 more: $1,000 · Recreation & SportsRIVER RAISIN WATERSHED COUNCIL: $750 · Science & Tech
Other$2,136,880Health$855,904Food & Nutrition$334,929Human Services$192,765Environment$92,957Recreation & Sports$25,636Science & Tech$750

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetST JOSEPH MERCY CHELSEA INC: $663,276 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetGrass Lake Farmers Market: $205,119 over 8y, 64% of budgetTRINITY HEALTH - MICHIGAN: $164,883 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetACORN FARMERS MARKET AND CAFE: $106,405 over 4y, 21% of budgetGRASS LAKE SENIOR CENTER: $93,595 over 6y, 24% of budgetHURON WATERLOO PATHWAYS INITIATIVE: $92,457 over 6y, 1.6% of budgetCHELSEA SENIOR CENTER: $85,270 over 8y, 4.7% of budgetDEXTER SENIOR CITIZENS INC: $31,150 over 2y, 2.7% of budgetNational Kidney Foundation of Michigan Inc: $26,995 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetPotawatomi Mountain Bike Association: $17,136 over 1y, 39% of budgetWEBSTER TOWNSHIP HISTORICAL SOCIETY: $14,500 over 3y, 8.3% of budgetCHELSEA CHILDRENS COOPERATIVE INC: $12,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetChelsea Education Foundation: $9,175 over 4y, 4.8% of budgetMAIN STREET PARK ALLIANCE: $7,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetFAITH IN ACTION INC: $7,400 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetRIVERFOLK MUSIC & ARTS ORGANIZATION: $6,000 over 2y, 5.9% of budgetWESTERN-WASHTENAW AREA VALUE EXPRESS: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetST LOUIS CENTER: $2,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetJackson YMCA Inc: $1,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetRIVER RAISIN WATERSHED COUNCIL: $750 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetChelsea Aquatic Club: $500 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetCHELSEA AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLEGACY LAND CONSERVANCY: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetStockbridge Community News: $330 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY OF GREATER ANN ARBOR: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMICHIGAN SCHOLASTIC CYCLING ASSOCIATION: $200 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWOMEN OF TOMORROW MENTOR AND SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM INC: $150 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 ST JOSEPH MERCY CHELSEA INC ↗
  • Who funds Grass Lake Farmers Market ↗
  • Who funds TRINITY HEALTH - MICHIGAN ↗
  • Who funds ACORN FARMERS MARKET AND CAFE ↗
  • Who funds GRASS LAKE SENIOR CENTER ↗
  • Who funds HURON WATERLOO PATHWAYS INITIATIVE ↗
  • Who funds CHELSEA SENIOR CENTER ↗
  • Who funds DEXTER SENIOR CITIZENS INC ↗
  • Who funds National Kidney Foundation of Michigan Inc ↗
  • Who funds OPEN AIR MARKET OF STOCKBRIDGE ↗
  • Who funds Potawatomi Mountain Bike Association ↗
  • Who funds WEBSTER TOWNSHIP HISTORICAL SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds CHELSEA CHILDRENS COOPERATIVE 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.

Ann Arbor Area Community FoundationMI33.6× affinity14 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation · Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan · St Joseph Mercy Chelsea Inc · Trinity Health - Michigan · United Way of Washtenaw County · Harry a and Margaret D Towsley Foundation · Consumers Energy Foundation · Michigan Health Endowment Fund · DTE Energy Foundation · Charles Stewart Mott Foundation · The Copper Nail Community Resale Shop · James a and Faith Knight 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 The Chelsea Health and Wellness Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Chelsea Health and Wellness 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
    13report 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 95 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 Chelsea Health and Wellness’ filings →

    More from the funding graph