· Private foundation
The Csig Foundation D/B/A Csig Cares
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.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 87% of THE CSIG FOUNDATION D/B/A CSIG CARES’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k4 grants · $12k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $38k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| LOVE FOR A CHILD | $37,500 |
| GABRIEL RICHARD HIGH SCHOOL | $5,000 |
| MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY | $4,030 |
| VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA ILLINOIS | $2,132 |
| BOWLING GREEN UNIVERSITY | $1,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY17–19, $20k) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
14 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- UOUniversity of Michigan6× · 2017–2023 · $234k · revenue +202% · 42% of their budget
- LFLOVE FOR A CHILD3× · 2023–2025 · $113k
- FGFR GABRIEL RICHARD HIGH SCHOOL4× · 2022–2025 · $39k
Funded once
GIRLS GROUPgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue +121%- ZIZAMAN INTERNATIONALgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +71%
- PPODERgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $9k · revenue +203%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Our mission is to equip women and non-binary folks to thrive in product management careers at all levels. we want all people to have equitable opportunities to build rewarding careers and shape the products of the future.
Building a movement of diverse, upwardly mobile college grads overcoming underemployment through digital skills and peer connections.
To inspire and prepare young people to succeed in a global economy
Usaging represents & supports the national network of area agencies on aging & advocates for the title vi native american aging programs that help older adults & people with disabilities live with optimal health, well-being, independence &…
To harness the collective expertise of ohio's ceos to advocate for policies that improve ohio's economic competitiveness.
To encourage and support its members as professionals responsible for the delivery of patient-focused care.
(continued on schedule o)
To advocate for, educate, and assist our target populations. our services address the needs of many different people, but we continue to target our services to older adults and persons with disabilities.
Business leaders for michigan is a nonprofit, nonpartisan statewide organization driven by ceos from the state's leading employers, all working toward a shared goal: making michigan a top 10 state for jobs, talent and a thriving economy.…
To advance and develop policies to overcome alzheimer's and all other dementia through increased investment in research, enhanced care and improved support.
Our mission is to accelerate scientific progress, understand the root causes of disease, and narrow the gap between discoveries and impact on patients.
The organizations mission is to inspire all girls to be strong,smart, and bold, through research-based, innovative, and educational programs and activities.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ozone House Inc and the most unlike its peers is Sharp Literacy Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
15 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 15 of the 31 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds University of Michigan ↗
- Who funds KENSINGTON VALLEY HOCKEY ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds GRIEVEWELL ↗
- Who funds ELE'S PLACE INC ↗
- Who funds GIRLS GROUP ↗
- Who funds ZAMAN INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds PODER ↗
- Who funds Therapeutic Riding Inc ↗
- Who funds The Cara Program ↗
- Who funds CHADTOUGH DEFEAT DIPG FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds OZONE HOUSE INC ↗
- Who funds THE GENEROSITY PROJECT CORP ↗
- Who funds 525 FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds SHARP LITERACY INC ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation · The Wadhams Family Foundation · Dte Energy Foundation · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization The Csig Foundation D/B/A Csig Cares funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.