· Private foundation
The Michel Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| AMERICAN LIVER FOUNDATION | $2,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $850 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD | $200 |
| FRANCIS W PARKER SCHOOL | $200 |
| ALS ASSOCIATION | $200 |
| CHICAGO BOTANIC GARDEN | $163 |
| ART INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO | $160 |
| CAMPERSHIPS FOR NEBAGAMON | $104 |
| ANTI DEFAMATION LEAGUE | $100 |
| CORAL RESTORATION FOUNDATION | $100 |
| THE NATURE CONSERVANCY | $100 |
| SANDY HOOK PROMISE FOUNDATION | $100 |
| WBEZ | $100 |
| IMMUNE DEFICIENCY FOUNDATION | $100 |
| Individual grant recipient | $100 |
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 (FY17–23, $680) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +45% since the first grant, against +3% for the ones you funded once.
30 repeat relationships — 15 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 7 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, 36% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k 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
- TATHE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS7× · 2018–2024 · $2k · revenue +67%
- TATHE ART INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO9× · 2017–2025 · $1k · revenue +45%
- FWFrancis W Parker School9× · 2017–2025 · $1k · revenue +31%
Funded once
- RFREPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $3k · revenue +365%
- LFLANGE FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $500 · revenue +82%
- SHSHELTER HOPE PET SHOPone grant, 2018 · $350
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.
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
Enhance the ability of actec members to provide the most efficient and highest quality services to their clients; develop qualified trust and estate counselors; improve and reform probate, trust and tax laws, procedures, and standards of…
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…
The mission of the alf is to advance the rule of law by advocating limited and efficient government, free enterprise, individual liberty, property rights, effective education, and the use of sound science in judicial and regulatory…
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
The institute's mission, as set out in its certificate of incorporation, is to promote the clarification and simplification of the law and its better adaptation to social needs, to secure the better administration of justice, and to…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Action Against Hunger - Usa and the most unlike its peers is Camp Nebagamon Foundation. 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 49 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% 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 13% 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.
40 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. 40 of the 61 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 REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ↗
- Who funds American Liver Foundation ↗
- Who funds THE ART INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds Francis W Parker School ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds LOYOLA UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO YOUTH SHAKESPEARE INC ↗
- Who funds EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY SUPPORT FUND INC ↗
- Who funds Humane World for Animals Inc ↗
- Who funds CAMP NEBAGAMON FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds OCEAN CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds THE CORAL RESTORATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds LANGE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ROATAN MARINE PARK INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds AMYOTROPHIC LATERAL SCLEROSIS ASSN ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds University of Chicago ↗
- Who funds AMHERST COLLEGE TRUSTEES ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds EVERY MOTHER COUNTS ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO PUBLIC MEDIA INC ↗
- Who funds ACTION AGAINST HUNGER - USA ↗
- Who funds Trustees of Tufts College ↗
- Who funds ISRAELI-AMERICAN COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds CAMP NEBAGAMON SCHOLARSHIP FUND ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds THE WHEELER SCHOOL ↗
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: The Pfizer Foundation Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Michel 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- The Coral Restoration Foundation Inc — 16% of income from government
- Trustees of Tufts College — 13% of income from government
- Sandy Hook Promise Foundation — 0% of income from government
- Amherst College Trustees — 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.