Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Michael Cameron Dempsey Fund

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$41k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$17k
Largest
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 2025.

Crime & Legal$135kEnvironment$99kReligion$42kArts & Culture$39kEducation$37kHuman Services$8kInternational$6kCommunity Improvement$6kOther$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$14,100
Median grant
3
States reached
$689k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ROOTED CAMPUS MINISTRIES$16,848
FIRST CHRISTIAN ACADEMY$14,100
N VUE PRODUCTIONS (S A V E XXII)$10,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 83% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%RELIANT: $10k → 13%LITTLE TRAVERSE CONSERVANCY: $12k → 9%UPPER PENINSULA LAND CONSERVANCY: $13k → 11%LANDSCAPE FORM INC: $3k → 12%MICHIGAN CIVIL WAR ASSOCIATION: $25k → 14%PLYMOUTH CHARTER TOWNSHIP: $4k → 21%N VUE PRODUCTIONS (S A V E XXII): $10k → 10%SAVE THE XXII: $8k → 14%SAMARITAN'S PURSE: $6k → 21%FIRST CHRISTIAN ACADEMY: $14k → 8%ROOTED CAMPUS MINISTRIES: $17k → 11%U OF M -MATTHEI BOTANICAL GARDEN: $25k → 21%FIRST CHRISTIAN ACADEMY: $13k → 8%RESTORATION PROJECT: $13k → 11%U OF M -MATTHEI BOTANICAL GARDEN: $25k → 21%RESTORATION PROJECT: $2k → 11%U OF M -MATTHEI BOTANICAL GARDEN: $25k → 21%CHARLOTTE MASON COMMUNITY SCHOOL: $10k → 21%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 49% of The Michael Cameron Dempsey Fund’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 38% of the giving stays in MI; by stated purpose, 40%.

The Michael Cameron Dempsey Fundlessmore 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.

67%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$252k · 4 repeat orgs$123k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +69% since the first grant, against +60% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
10

Total granted

$252k
$97k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+69%
+60%

Still filing today

50%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 34% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $27k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
ReligionEnvironmentCrime & LegalEducationYouth 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

  • JUSTICEMATTERS INC
    3× · 2021–2023 · $135k · revenue +25%
  • UO
    U OF M -MATTHEI BOTANICAL GARDEN
    3× · 2018–2020 · $75k
  • FC
    FIRST CHRISTIAN ACADEMY
    2× · 2024–2025 · $27k

Funded once

  • MC
    MICHIGAN CIVIL WAR ASSOCIATION
    one grant, 2024 · $25k
  • UP
    UPPER PENINSULA LAND CONSERVANCYgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $13k · revenue +145%
  • LT
    Little Traverse Conservancy Incgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $12k · revenue +60%
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
05the 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 16 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
4/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

U OF M -MATTHEI BOTANICAL GARDEN: $75,000 · OtherU OF M -MATTHEI BOTANICAL GARDENFIRST CHRISTIAN ACADEMY: $27,000 · OtherFIRST CHRISTIAN ACADEMYMICHIGAN CIVIL WAR ASSOCIATION: $25,000 · OtherMICHIGAN CIVIL WAR ASSOCIATIONN VUE PRODUCTIONS (S A V E XXII): $10,000 · OtherN VUE PRODUCTIONS (S A V E XXII)CHARLOTTE MASON COMMUNITY SCHOOL: $10,000 · OtherCHARLOTTE MASON COMMUNITY SCHOOLRELIANT MISSION INC: $9,900 · OtherRELIANT MISSION INCIndividual grant recipient: $7,850 · Other+2 more: $7,410 · OtherJUSTICEMATTERS INC: $135,000 · Crime & LegalJUSTICEMATTERS INCUPPER PENINSULA LAND CONSERVANCY: $12,500 · EnvironmentLittle Traverse Conservancy Inc: $11,863 · EnvironmentRESTORATION PROJECT: $15,015 · ReligionSAMARITAN'S PURSE: $6,000 · ReligionROOTED CAMPUS MINISTRIES: $16,848 · Youth DevelopmentUS Chamber of Commerce Foundation: $6,000 · Education
Other$172,160Crime & Legal$135,000Environment$24,363Religion$21,015Youth Development$16,848Education$6,000

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 budgetJUSTICEMATTERS INC: $135,000 over 3y, 3.9% of budgetROOTED CAMPUS MINISTRIES: $16,848 over 1y, 10% of budgetRESTORATION PROJECT: $15,015 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetUPPER PENINSULA LAND CONSERVANCY: $12,500 over 1y, 5.7% of budgetLittle Traverse Conservancy Inc: $11,863 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetUS Chamber of Commerce Foundation: $6,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSAMARITAN'S PURSE: $6,000 over 1y, 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.

  • Who funds JUSTICEMATTERS INC ↗
  • Who funds ROOTED CAMPUS MINISTRIES ↗
  • Who funds RESTORATION PROJECT ↗
  • Who funds UPPER PENINSULA LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds Little Traverse Conservancy Inc ↗
  • Who funds US Chamber of Commerce Foundation ↗
  • Who funds SAMARITAN'S PURSE ↗

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.

Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO5.9× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Michael Cameron Dempsey Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Michael Cameron Dempsey Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    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 16 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 Michael Cameron Dempsey’s filings →

    More from the funding graph