Skip to content
The Dorris C Michalske Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

The Dorris C Michalske Trust

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.

$117k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$12k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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$306kEducation$204kEnvironment$102kFood & Nutrition$102kHuman Services$102kCommunity Improvement$102kPublic Benefit$102k
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$11,677
Median grant
5
States reached
$1.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE CITY MISSION$11,677
CLEVELAND FOODBANK INC$11,677
SALVATION ARMY NATIONAL CORP$11,677
SHRINERS HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN$11,677
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN$11,677
CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION$11,677
COLLEGE NOW GREATER CLEVELAND$11,677
GREENPEACE FUND$11,677
THE CITY CLUB FORUM FDN$11,677
CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY$11,677
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 99% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%SALVATION ARMY: $13k → 14%GREENPEACE FUND: $12k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $13k → 14%THE CITY CLUB FORUM FDN: $12k → 17%SALVATION ARMY NATIONAL CORP: $12k → 9%SALVATION ARMY: $11k → 14%GREENPEACE FUND: $11k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $12k → 14%SALVATION ARMY: $11k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $11k → 14%COLLEGE NOW GREATER CLEVELAND: $13k → 17%SALVATION ARMY: $11k → 14%GREENPEACE FUND: $13k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $11k → 14%COLLEGE NOW GREATER CLEVELAND: $12k → 17%SALVATION ARMY: $11k → 14%GREENPEACE FUND: $11k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $11k → 14%COLLEGE NOW GREATER CLEVELAND: $11k → 17%GREENPEACE FUND: $11k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $11k → 14%COLLEGE NOW GREATER CLEVELAND: $11k → 17%GREENPEACE FUND: $11k → 14%COLLEGE NOW GREATER CLEVELAND: $11k → 17%COLLEGE NOW GREATER CLEVELAND: $11k → 17%CLEVELAND FOODBANK INC: $13k → 17%CLEVELAND FOODBANK INC: $12k → 17%CLEVELAND FOODBANK INC: $11k → 17%CLEVELAND FOODBANK INC: $11k → 17%CLEVELAND FOODBANK INC: $11k → 17%CLEVELAND FOODBANK INC: $11k → 17%THE CITY MISSION: $13k → 17%THE CITY MISSION: $12k → 17%THE CITY MISSION: $11k → 17%THE CITY MISSION: $11k → 17%THE CITY MISSION: $11k → 17%THE CITY MISSION: $11k → 17%THE CITY CLUB FORUM FDN: $13k → 17%THE CITY CLUB FORUM FDN: $11k → 17%THE CITY CLUB FORUM FDN: $11k → 17%THE CITY CLUB FORUM FDN: $11k → 17%THE CITY CLUB FORUM FDN: $11k → 17%CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION: $12k → 17%CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY: $13k → 17%CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY: $12k → 17%CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY: $11k → 17%CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY: $11k → 17%CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY: $11k → 17%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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.0M · 10 repeat orgs$12k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
1

Total granted

$1.0M
$12k

Still filing today

70%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $12k 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
EducationFood & NutritionEnvironmentHealthOther
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

  • CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY
    9× · 2017–2025 · $102k · revenue +50%
  • GC
    GREATER CLEVELAND FOOD BANK INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $102k · revenue +10%
  • UO
    University of Michigan
    9× · 2017–2025 · $102k · revenue +202%

Funded once

  • SA
    SALVATION ARMY NATIONAL CORP
    one grant, 2025 · $12k
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
04the 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 11 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
6/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CITY MISSION: $102,036 · OtherCITY MISSIONUniversity of Michigan: $102,036 · OtherUniversity of MichiganCLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION: $102,036 · OtherCLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATIONTHE SALVATION ARMY: $90,359 · OtherTHE SALVATION ARMY+1 more: $11,677 · OtherCASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY: $102,036 · EducationCASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITYCOLLEGE NOW GREATER CLEVELAND INC: $102,036 · EducationCOLLEGE NOW GREATER CLEVELAND INCTHE CITY CLUB FORUM FOUNDATION: $102,036 · EducationTHE CITY CLUB FORUM FOUNDATIONGREATER CLEVELAND FOOD BANK INC: $102,036 · Food & NutritionGREATER CLE…GREENPEACE FUND INC: $102,036 · EnvironmentGREENPEACE …THE SHRINERS' HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN: $102,036 · HealthTHE SHRINER…
Other$408,144Education$306,108Food & Nutrition$102,036Environment$102,036Health$102,036

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 budgetCASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY: $102,036 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetGREATER CLEVELAND FOOD BANK INC: $102,036 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Michigan: $102,036 over 9y, 5.2% of budgetGREENPEACE FUND INC: $102,036 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetTHE SHRINERS' HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN: $102,036 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetCOLLEGE NOW GREATER CLEVELAND INC: $102,036 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CITY CLUB FORUM FOUNDATION: $102,036 over 9y, 8.9% 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 CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds GREATER CLEVELAND FOOD BANK INC ↗
  • Who funds University of Michigan ↗
  • Who funds GREENPEACE FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds THE SHRINERS' HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN ↗
  • Who funds COLLEGE NOW GREATER CLEVELAND INC ↗
  • Who funds THE CITY CLUB FORUM FOUNDATION ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The Dorris C Michalske Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Dorris C Michalske Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’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 6%
  • The Shriners' Hospital for Children: 6% 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.

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 11 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 Dorris C Michalske’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