Skip to content
The Junior League of Grand Rapids Michigan Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

The Junior League of Grand Rapids Michigan Inc

An organization of women committed to promoting voluntarism, developing the potential of women, and improving communities.

$17k
Granted FY2021
6
Grants FY2021
2
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its 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, FY2018 to 2021.

Public Benefit$50kCommunity Improvement$20kFood & Nutrition$14kYouth Development$13kHousing & Shelter$10kHuman Services$10kHealth$3kEducation$3kOther$0
02FY2021 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2021

  • Under $10k5 grants · $7k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$2,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$725k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MEL TROTTER MINISTRIES$10,000
KIDS' FOOD BASKET$3,700
CHERRY HEALTH FOUNDATION$2,500
GILDA'S CLUB OF GRAND RAPIDS$250
AJLI DISASTER RELIEF FUND$100
GRAND VALLEY UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION$60
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 (FY19–19, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%YWCA WEST CENTRAL MICHIGAN: $10k → 11%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 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
Girl Scouts Heart of Michigan

Girl scouting builds girls of courage, confidence and character, who make the world a better place

Youth Development
2
Boys & Girls Club of Greater Holland

Programs for local youth

Youth Development
3
Boys & Girls Clubs of Greater Southwest Michigan

To inspire and enable all young people, especially those who need us the most, to realize their full potential as productive, responsible, and caring citizens.

Youth Development
4
Mymichigan Medical Group

Creating healthy communities - together

Health
5
Michigan Chamber of Commerce

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

—
6
Mymichigan Medical Center Midland

Creating healthy communities - together

Health
7
Girl Scouts of Western Ohio

Girl scouting builds girls of courage, confidence, and character, who make the world a better place.

Youth Development
8
Girls on the Run of Greater Kalamazoo

Girls on the run of greater kalamazoo is dedicated to creating a world where every girl knows and activates her limitless potential and is free to boldly pursue her dreams

Youth Development
9
Girls Incorporated of Sioux City

Inspiring all girls to be strong, smart, and bold.

Youth Development
10
The Junior League of Grand Rapids Michigan Inc

An organization of women committed to promoting voluntarism, developing the potential of women, and improving communities. women and children's issues are at the forefront of the efforts to build a better community that values education,…

Community Improvement
11
Michigan Pharmacists Association

To encourage and support its members as professionals responsible for the delivery of patient-focused care.

—
12
Mymichigan Medical Center Alma

Creating healthy communities - together

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Gilda's Club Grand Rapids; the most unlike its peers is Cherry Street Services Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

9 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. 9 of the 12 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CITY OF GRAND RAPIDS: $50,000 · OtherCITY OF GRAND RAPIDSJL WAY PROJECT: $19,578 · OtherJL WAY PROJECTGRAND RAPIDS YOUTH COMMONWEALTH INC: $10,000 · OtherGRAND RAPIDS YOUTH COMMONWEALTH INCMEL TROTTER MINISTRIES: $10,000 · OtherMEL TROTTER MINISTRIES+2 more: $260 · OtherKIDS' FOOD BASKET INC: $13,700 · Food & NutritionKIDS' FOOD B…YWCA WEST CENTRAL MICHIGAN: $10,000 · Human ServicesYWCA WEST…GRAND RAPIDS PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION: $2,500 · EducationGIRLS ON THE RUN WEST MICHIGAN: $2,500 · Recreation & SportsCherry Street Services Inc: $2,500 · HealthGILDA'S CLUB GRAND RAPIDS: $250 · Civil Rights
Other$89,838Food & Nutrition$13,700Human Services$10,000Education$2,500Recreation & Sports$2,500Health$2,500Civil Rights$250

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetKIDS' FOOD BASKET INC: $13,700 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetYWCA WEST CENTRAL MICHIGAN: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetGRAND RAPIDS YOUTH COMMONWEALTH INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetMEL TROTTER MINISTRIES: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCherry Street Services Inc: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGILDA'S CLUB GRAND RAPIDS: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ASSOCIATION OF JUNIOR LEAGUES INTERNATIONAL INC: $200 over 2y, 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.

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.

Heart of West Michiga…Frey FoundationGrand Rapids Communit…Dick and Betsy Devos …WK Kellogg FoundationSteelcase FoundationDouglas & Maria Devos…The Wege FoundationNatl Christian Charit…The Bank of America C…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Heart of West Michigan United WayMI17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Heart of West Michigan United Way · Frey Foundation · Grand Rapids Community Foundation · Dick and Betsy Devos Family Foundation · WK Kellogg Foundation · Steelcase Foundation · Douglas & Maria Devos Foundation · The Wege Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Junior League of Grand Rapids Michigan Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Junior League of Grand Rapids Michigan Inc. 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%10%20%30%40%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 · 0–40%
    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 12 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2021, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Junior League of Grand Rapids Michigan’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