· Private foundation
The Googasian Family 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k45 grants · $41k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $12k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $100k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| OAKLAND UNIVERSITY | $100,000 |
| ENLACE USA | $11,850 |
| WALLOON LAKE ASSOCIATION & CONSERVANCY | $5,125 |
| THE CARTER CENTER ONE COPENHILL | $5,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $3,000 |
| PRODIGAL CHILD MINISTRIES | $2,500 |
| OPERATION BLESSING | $2,500 |
| HABITAT FOR HUMANITY | $2,200 |
| MICHIGAN PUBLIC | $2,000 |
| CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST | $1,600 |
| ST LAZARUS SERBIAN ORTHODOX CATHEDRAL | $1,500 |
| UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MARCHING BAND | $1,000 |
| NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE | $1,000 |
| LITTLE TRAVERSE CONSERVANCY | $1,000 |
| ADVENTURES IN MISSIONS | $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 (FY20–25, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 27% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
57 repeat relationships — 42 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
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, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k 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 Michigan4× · 2021–2024 · $13k · revenue +96%
- TCTHE CARTER CENTER INC2× · 2021–2022 · $6k · revenue +32%
- NLNO LONGER BOUND INC2× · 2020–2021 · $4k · revenue +92%
Funded once
- SPSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INCone grant, 2020 · $2k · revenue +13%
- HFHABITAT FOR HUMANITYgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $1k · revenue +149%
- UOUNIVERSITY OF MICHGIAN PROJECT HEALTHY SCHOOLSone grant, 2024 · $1k
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.
Nacwa is the national voice of public clean water utilities, shaping water policy, convening a vibrant peer network, and empowering water leaders.
To promote public health, safety, and welfare through the improvement of the quality and quantity of drinking water and the development and furtherance of understanding of the problems relating thereto.
Gdahc mission: together with our partners, we empower and improve the health and economic vitality of individuals, organizations and communities by catalyzing the power of collaboration. gdahc vision: healthy people. healthy community.…
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
Namati, inc. (namati) is dedicated to putting the law in people's hands. we strive to build a just world, in which every one of us can take part in the decisions and demand accountability from the institutions that affect our lives.…
We safeguard the earth: its people, its plants and animals, and (see schedule o) the natural systems on which all life depends. we work to restore the integrity of the elements that sustain life - air, land, and water - to defend…
The minnesota center for environmental advocacy is a nonprofit organization that uses law, science and research to protect minnesota's environment, its natural resources and the health of its people.
It is our mission at huron pines to conserve and enhance northern michigan's natural resources to ensure healthy water, protected places and vibrant communities. for alomst 50 years, our work across the forests, lakes and streams of…
To be the leading voice of medicine to make minnesota the healthiest state and the best place to practice.
To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Michigan Humane Society and the most unlike its peers is Vets Returning Home Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 37 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
50 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. 50 of the 83 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 ENLACE USA ↗
- Who funds Prodigal Child Ministries Inc ↗
- Who funds University of Michigan ↗
- Who funds WALLOON LAKE ASSOCIATION AND CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds THE CARTER CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds THE BARACK OBAMA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NO LONGER BOUND INC ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF TROY ↗
- Who funds SHADES OF PINK FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE MATTHEW BITTKER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SpringHill Camps ↗
- Who funds FOR LOVE OF WATER ↗
- Who funds Top of Michigan Trails Council ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Little Traverse Conservancy Inc ↗
- Who funds GRACE CENTERS OF HOPE ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF CAMP BATAWAGAMA ↗
- Who funds MICHIGAN PARALYZED VETERANS OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds EASTERSEALS MORC HEALTH CARE INC ↗
- Who funds HAVEN INC ↗
- Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ↗
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: Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan · Dte Energy Foundation · Petoskey-Harbor Springs Area Community Foundation · United Way for Southeastern Michigan · Edward & Helen Mardigian Foundation · Triford Foundation · The Ralph C Wilson Jr Foundation · Dotopia · Charles Stewart Mott Foundation · The Kresge Foundation · Patagoniaorg · WK Kellogg 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 Googasian Family Foundation 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.
- Big Brothers Big Sisters of Delaware Inc — 73% of income from government
- National Indian Child Welfare Association — 0% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 0% of income from government
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.