Skip to content
The Richard F and Carolyn a Chormann Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Richard F and Carolyn a Chormann 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.

$250k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$125k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Arts & Culture$1.0MEnvironment$409kEducation$297kHealth$275kHuman Services$35kRecreation & Sports$28kReligion$26kPublic Safety & Disaster$10k
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $35k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $215k
$90,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$4.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LEELANAU CONSERVANCY$125,000
INTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS$90,000
FISHTOWN PRESERVATION SOCIETY$25,000
GLEN LAKE FIRE AND RESCUE ASSOCIATION INC$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:

Its human-services grants (FY18–18, $35k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%PAWS ASSISTANCE DOGS INC: $35k → 10%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 9% of The Richard F and Carolyn a Chormann Family Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 94% of the giving stays in MI; by stated purpose, 82%.

The Richard F and Carolyn a Chormann Family Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 13% directed abroad (not shown)
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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.9M · 9 repeat orgs$172k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +78% since the first grant, against +45% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
7

Total granted

$1.9M
$162k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+78%
+45%

Still filing today

78%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Arts & CultureEducationEnvironmentHuman ServicesOther
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

  • MH
    MUNSON HEALTHCARE FOUNDATIONS
    6× · 2018–2023 · $275k · revenue +78%
  • WM
    WESTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION
    6× · 2017–2024 · $184k · revenue +149%
  • FP
    FISHTOWN PRESERVATION SOCIETY INC
    4× · 2017–2025 · $55k · revenue +258%

Funded once

  • MU
    Miami University Foundation
    one grant, 2020 · $50k · revenue +14%
  • GP
    Golden PAWS Assistance Dogs Incgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $35k · revenue +66%
  • GL
    GLEN LAKE COMMUNITY LIBRARY
    one grant, 2018 · $25k
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
Lake Superior State University Foundation

The Lake Superior State University Foundation exists for the sole purpose of promoting, receiving, managing, and disbursing donations and contributions for the benefit of Lake Superior State University.

Education
2
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
3
Legacy Land Conservancy

Safeguard southern michigan's land and water to support diverse, resilient, and thriving communities - forever

Environment
4
The Northern Michigan University Foundation

The nmu foundation will establish and foster relationships to generate resources that benefit the strategic goals of northern michigan university.

Education
5
Michigan Legacy Art Park

Inspire awareness, appreciation and passion for michigan's history and stories, culture and environment through the arts.

Arts & Culture
6
Michigan Water Environment Association

Be and create stewards for the water environment of michigan. provide high quality education for michigan's water professionals. educate and inform policy makers and the general public. promote scientifically sound environmental practices…

Environment
7
Lansing Art Gallery & Education Center

The lansing art gallery & education center provides public awareness, education and enjoyment of the visual arts by promoting the work of michigan artists.

Arts & Culture
8
Lakewood Heritage Foundation

To solicit and collect donations for the preservation and restoration of lakewood's natural resources, including its landscape, trees, gardens and lake, and its historic monuments, markers and buildings, and for related educational…

Community Improvement
9
Southwest Michigan Land Conservency Inc

Acquisition and conservation of natural areas.

Environment
10
Great Lakes Center for the Arts

The Center's mission is to inspire, entertain, educate, and serve all in Northern Michigan year-round by presenting exceptional experiences across the full spectrum of the performing arts and offering impactful educational opportunities.

Arts & Culture
11
Friends of Ludington State Park

FLSP was established May 25, 1992 and functions privately, as a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, to promote the wise use and conservation of the Ludington State Park, one of the most beautiful state parks ever.

Philanthropy
12
Lake Leelanau Lake Association

The lake leelanau lake association is dedicated to protecting and enhancing the quality and beauty of lake leelanau and its surrounding watershed for current and future generations.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Leelanau Conservancy; the most unlike its peers is Adrian Schools Education Foundation. 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

13 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. 13 of the 17 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)
12/13
Grantees still filing
9/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

INTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $951,701 · Arts & CultureINTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTSFISHTOWN PRESERVATION SOCIETY INC: $55,000 · Arts & Culture+3 more: $26,500 · Arts & CultureLEELANAU CONSERVANCY: $409,000 · EnvironmentLEELANAU CONSERVANCYMUNSON HEALTHCARE FOUNDATIONS: $275,000 · OtherMUNSON HEALTHCARE FO…GLEN LAKE ASSOCIATION INC: $28,000 · OtherGLEN LAKE ASSOCIATIO…GLEN LAKE COMMUNITY LIBRARY: $25,000 · OtherGLEN LAKE COMMUNITY …ADRIAN SCHOOLS EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $25,000 · OtherADRIAN SCHOOLS EDUCA…PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH USA: $20,000 · Other+2 more: $16,000 · OtherWESTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $184,383 · EducationWESTERN MICHI…Miami University Foundation: $50,000 · EducationMiami Univers…ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION FOR A NEW AMERICAN UNIVERSITY: $12,500 · EducationGolden PAWS Assistance Dogs Inc: $35,000 · Human Services
Arts & Culture$1,033,201Environment$409,000Other$389,000Education$246,883Human Services$35,000

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 budgetINTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $951,701 over 9y, 0.3% of budgetLEELANAU CONSERVANCY: $409,000 over 9y, 6.4% of budgetMUNSON HEALTHCARE FOUNDATIONS: $275,000 over 6y, 0.8% of budgetWESTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $184,383 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetFISHTOWN PRESERVATION SOCIETY INC: $55,000 over 4y, 1.5% of budgetGolden PAWS Assistance Dogs Inc: $35,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetGLEN LAKE ASSOCIATION INC: $28,000 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetBalancing Environment and Rehabilitation Bear: $15,000 over 1y, 7.5% of budgetARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION FOR A NEW AMERICAN UNIVERSITY: $12,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetGLEN ARBOR ARTS CENTER: $10,000 over 1y, 3.1% 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.

Grand Traverse Region…American Endowment Fo…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Grand Traverse Regional Community FoundationMI13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Grand Traverse Regional Community Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Richard F and Carolyn a Chormann Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Richard F and Carolyn a Chormann Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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 · 0–5%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Richard F and Carolyn a Chormann Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Richard F and Carolyn a Chormann Family Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 17 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 Richard F and Carolyn a Chormann Family’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