Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Mary C Currie Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$89k
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$39k
Largest
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Public Benefit$335kPhilanthropy$96kHuman Services$77kRecreation & Sports$32kReligion$25kHousing & Shelter$25kAnimals$20kEnvironment$20kOther$0
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k6 grants · $30k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $59k
$5,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CITY OF MIDLAND$39,000
CITY OF AUBURN$20,000
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ALLIANCE$5,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
GIRL SCOUTS HEART OF MICHIGAN$5,000
THE ARC OF MIDLAND$5,000
CLEVELAND MANOR$5,000
HOME TO STAY$5,000
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 (FY18–24, $33k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 24% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 14%TONI & TRISH HOUSE: $4k → 14%TONI & TRISH HOUSE: $4k → 14%SHELTERHOUSE: $10k → 9%FAMILY AND CHILDRENS SERVICES: $10k → 9%CLEVELAND MANOR: $5k → 9%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 11% of The Mary C Currie Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 99% of the giving stays in MI; by stated purpose, 89%.

The Mary C Currie Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
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.

70%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$418k · 9 repeat orgs$182k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
21

Total granted

$418k
$157k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+20%
+43%

Still filing today

33%
48%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 72% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesEnvironmentRecreation & SportsHousing & ShelterAnimalsYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • CO
    CITY OF MIDLAND
    8× · 2017–2024 · $290k
  • CO
    CITY OF AUBURN
    4× · 2021–2024 · $45k
  • MP
    MEMORIAL PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
    3× · 2017–2019 · $25k

Funded once

  • BO
    BBBS OF THE GREAT LAKES BAY REGION
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
  • EV
    Eagle Village Incgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +43%
  • WM
    WEST MIDLAND FAMILY CENTERgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +193%
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
Midlands Humane Society

To protect and nurture companion animals and enrich the lives of people who love them.

Animals
2
Midland County Cancer Society Dba Cancer Services

To provide personal and compassionate support to cancer patients and their caregivers in our community.

—
3
Midmichigan Health Services

To provide high quality community-oriented, patient-centered health services for all.

Health
4
Land Conservancy of West Michigan

Our mission is conserving West Michigans ecologically critical land. We protect land by creating public nature preserves, providing support to communities and local governments in creating natural areas, and helping private landowners…

Environment
5
Vail House Midland Inc

To provide high quality, individualized care and community inclusion for the people we serve so they can have full and happy lives.

Health
6
Mid Michigan Community Action Agency Inc

Mid michigan community action guides local residents on the path to self-sufficiency through empowerment, education and community enrichment.

—
7
Lincoln Behavioral Services

To provide comprehensive outpatient mental health services to over 5400 individuals and their families in a consumer driven person centered delivery system. Approximately 15% of our staff members are our clients who are involved in a…

Health
8
Midland Camping Council Inc

To provide facilities for nonprofit organizations to enjoy the experience of nature in michigan, promote ourdoor education, and to offer camping enjoyment to the people of midland county.

Recreation & Sports
9
Housing Services of Mid Michigan

To assist people with low or moderate income to obtain safe and affordable housing

Housing & Shelter
10
Hospice of Midland Inc

Hospice provides care from the heart to fulfill the unique needs of patients and families.

—
11
Michigan Assoc of Community Mental Health Boards

Assisting the community mental health boards of michigan in developing methods for mental health planning, care and treatment.

—
12
Reece Endeavor of Midland

To meet the growing housing needs of people with special needs throughout Midland County - we want to offer them stability and affordability and help them become integrated into the community.

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Council On Domestic Violence & Sexual Assault; the most unlike its peers is Wildlife Recovery Association. 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

17 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. 17 of the 36 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
10/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CITY OF MIDLAND: $290,150 · OtherCITY OF MIDLANDCITY OF AUBURN: $45,000 · OtherCITY OF AUBURNMEMORIAL PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH: $25,000 · Other+21 more: $156,800 · Other+21 moreMIDLAND AREA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $96,250 · PhilanthropyMIDLAND AREA CO…WEST MIDLAND FAMILY CENTER: $10,000 · Human ServicesFamily & Children's Services of Mid-Michigan Inc: $10,000 · Human ServicesCOUNCIL ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE & SEXUAL ASSAULT: $10,000 · Human ServicesTONI & TRISH HOUSE FOR THE TERMINALLY ILL: $8,000 · Human ServicesCLEVELAND MANOR INC: $5,000 · Human ServicesCHIPPEWA NATURE CENTER: $10,000 · EnvironmentDAHLIA HILL SOCIETY OF MIDLAND: $5,000 · EnvironmentWILDLIFE RECOVERY ASSOCIATION: $10,000 · AnimalsSLEEP IN HEAVENLY PEACE INC: $5,000 · Housing & ShelterGREATER MIDLAND COMMUNITY CTRS INC: $5,000 · Recreation & SportsGIRL SCOUTS HEART OF MICHIGAN: $5,000 · Youth Development
Other$516,950Philanthropy$96,250Human Services$43,000Environment$15,000Animals$10,000Housing & Shelter$5,000Recreation & Sports$5,000Youth Development$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMIDLAND AREA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $96,250 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetWILDLIFE RECOVERY ASSOCIATION: $10,000 over 2y, 5.1% of budgetEagle Village Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWEST MIDLAND FAMILY CENTER: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetHumane Society of Midland County: $10,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetFamily & Children's Services of Mid-Michigan Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetCOUNCIL ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE & SEXUAL ASSAULT: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCHIPPEWA NATURE CENTER: $10,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTONI & TRISH HOUSE FOR THE TERMINALLY ILL: $8,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetSLEEP IN HEAVENLY PEACE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDAHLIA HILL SOCIETY OF MIDLAND: $5,000 over 1y, 6.4% of budgetThe Arc of Midland: $5,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetMIDLAND VOLUNTEERS FOR RECYCLING: $5,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetCLEVELAND MANOR INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetGREATER MIDLAND COMMUNITY CTRS INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGIRL SCOUTS HEART OF MICHIGAN: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFISH TALES: $5,000 over 1y, 0.6% 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 MIDLAND AREA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds WILDLIFE RECOVERY ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds Eagle Village Inc ↗
  • Who funds WEST MIDLAND FAMILY CENTER ↗
  • Who funds Humane Society of Midland County ↗
  • Who funds Family & Children's Services of Mid-Michigan Inc ↗
  • Who funds COUNCIL ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE & SEXUAL ASSAULT ↗
  • Who funds CHIPPEWA NATURE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds TONI & TRISH HOUSE FOR THE TERMINALLY ILL ↗
  • Who funds SLEEP IN HEAVENLY PEACE INC ↗
  • Who funds DAHLIA HILL SOCIETY OF MIDLAND ↗
  • Who funds The Arc of Midland ↗
  • Who funds MIDLAND VOLUNTEERS FOR RECYCLING ↗
  • Who funds CLEVELAND MANOR INC ↗
  • Who funds GREATER MIDLAND COMMUNITY CTRS INC ↗
  • Who funds GIRL SCOUTS HEART OF MICHIGAN ↗
  • Who funds FISH TALES ↗

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.

Midland Area Community FoundationMI36.6× affinity15 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Midland Area Community Foundation · The Charles J Strosacker Foundation · The Herbert H & Grace a Dow Foundation · Rollin M Gerstacker Foundation · Alden and Vada Dow Fund · The Patricia and David Kepler Foundation · Consumers Energy Foundation · Harry a and Margaret D Towsley Foundation · Barstow Foundation · The Doan Family Foundation · Laura Ludington Hollenbeck Foundation · United Way of Midland County

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 Mary C Currie Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Mary C Currie Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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 36 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Mary C Currie’s filings →

    More from the funding graph