Skip to content

· Public charity

The Right Place Inc

The right place is the economic development organization that drives current and long-term economic prosperity in west michigan.

$5.9M
Granted FY2025still arriving
61
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$475k
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, FY2020 to 2024.

Arts & Culture$24MCommunity Improvement$12MHuman Services$1.6MEmployment$1.4MScience & Tech$508kFood & Nutrition$398kHousing & Shelter$313kEducation$84kOther$0
02FY2025 · 61 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $15k
  • $10k–50k31 grants · $808k
  • $50k–250k20 grants · $2.5M
  • $250k+8 grants · $2.6M
$38,806
Median grant
3
States reached
$40M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CITY OF HASTINGS$474,500
CITY OF HOLLAND$400,000
GRAND RAPIDS PUBLIC MUSEUM$384,837
COMSTOCK HCV LLC$332,617
HOLLAND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT LLC$281,750
FANS OF VALLEY FIELD$254,222
TRYGON INVESTMENTS FUND 8 LLC$253,504
HITACHI INDUSTRIAL HOLDINGS AMERICAS INC$250,000
CASCADE CHARTER TOWNSHIP$225,000
GREATER MUSKEGON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT$224,550
S J KINGMA & ASSOCIATES LLC$192,185
GUN LAKE INVESTMENTS LLC$170,000
CITY OF IONIA$150,000
ABER INDUSTRIAL LLC$150,000
CITY OF BIG RAPIDS$147,564
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 (FY20–24, $366k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%RELIEF AFTER VIOLENT ENCOUNTER - IONIAMONTCALM INC: $15k → 12%MATTHEWS HOUSE CHRISTIAN THRIFT STORE: $8k → 12%SABLE POINTS LIGHTHOUSE KEEPERS ASSOCIATION: $6k → 10%TREETOPS COLLECTIVE: $20k → 11%VIBRANT FUTURES: $159k → 11%VIBRANT FUTURES: $110k → 11%GRAND RAPIDS URBAN LEAGUE: $36k → 11%HISPANIC CENTER OF WESTERN MICHIGAN: $13k → 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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

8%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.6M · 95 repeat orgs$43M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +67% since the first grant, against +43% for those funded once.

95 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 89 since wound down; 55 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

95
1116

Total granted

$3.6M
$38M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+67%
+43%

Still filing today

6%
4%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 11% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5.3M went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Arts & CultureHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementEducationRecreation & SportsHealthOther
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

  • MA
    MUSKEGON AREA FIRST
    2× · 2022–2025 · $234k · revenue +28%
  • BL
    BLUE LAKE FINE ARTS CAMP
    2× · 2020–2021 · $32k · revenue +331%
  • WM
    Wyoming Moose Lodge 763
    2× · 2020–2021 · $30k · revenue +67%

Funded once

  • GI
    GOTION INC
    one grant, 2024 · $24M
  • VO
    VILLAGE OF SHELBY
    one grant, 2024 · $653k
  • MC
    MECOSTA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
    one grant, 2023 · $543k · revenue -81% · 87% of their budget
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
Greater Lansing Destination Development Foundation
Community Improvement
2
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
3
Visit Lenawee

To promote lenawee county as a destination providing contemporary amenities to transient guests in a historical and cultural setting for the economic benefit of the community.

—
4
Broadway Grand Rapids

To present west michigan audiences with high quality broadway productions and to provide student arts education programs, enriching the community through professional performing arts, as well as to expand the diversity of theatre in the…

—
5
Traverse City Center of Entrepreneurship

To cultivate a thriving and connected startup ecosystem in nw lower michigan.

—
6
Michigan Chamber of Commerce

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

—
7
Saginaw County Chamber of Commerce

To be a catalyst for economic and community progress within the great lakes bay region.

—
8
Lenawee Economic Development Corp

to stimulate economic development, attract new businesses, grow established businesses and support entrepreneurial endeavors in Lenawee County

—
9
Michigan West Coast Chamber of Commerce

The west coast chamber exists to be a catalyst for business growth and development, a convener of leaders and influencers, and a champion for a thriving community.

—
10
Grand Rapids Area Community Engagement Fund Grace Fund

To operate exclusively for the promotion of civic action and social welfare by promoting the common good and general welfare of the residents of, and visitors to, the State of Michigan; To support public policies on the federal, state, and…

—
11
Grand Rapids Area Chamber of Commerce
Community Improvement
12
Gratiot Area Chamber of Commerce

To promote business and community growth and development and prepserve the competitive enterprise system of business.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Grand Rapids Children's Museum; the most unlike its peers is Genevieve and Donald S Gilmore Fdn. 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

61 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 61 of the 1,266 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
28
Early backer (in before they grew)
58/61
Grantees still filing
43/61
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GOTION INC: $23,670,874 · OtherGOTION INC+186 more: $10,343,941 · Other+186 moreGRAND RAPIDS PUBLIC MUSEUM: $384,837 · Arts & CultureBLUE LAKE FINE ARTS CAMP: $32,021 · Arts & CultureVIBRANT FUTURES: $268,673 · Human ServicesGRAND RAPIDS URBAN LEAGUE: $36,000 · Human ServicesTreetops Collective: $20,000 · Human ServicesMUSKEGON AREA FIRST: $233,550 · Community ImprovementMICHIGAN TECH ENTERPRISE CORPORATION: $28,000 · Community ImprovementLANSING 501: $28,000 · Community ImprovementTRAVERSE CONNECT: $28,000 · Community ImprovementWEST MICHIGAN CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE: $45,000 · EducationWEST MICHIGAN CENTER FOR ARTS & TECHNOLOGY: $41,040 · EducationCOMMUNITY RECOVERY INTERNATIONAL: $25,000 · HealthIONIA FREE FAIR ASSOCIATION: $20,250 · Recreation & Sports
Other$34,014,815Arts & Culture$416,858Human Services$324,673Community Improvement$317,550Education$86,040Health$25,000Recreation & Sports$20,250

Showing the 200 largest grantees by grant value.

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 budgetMECOSTA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $543,234 over 1y, 87% of budgetGRAND RAPIDS PUBLIC MUSEUM: $384,837 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetVIBRANT FUTURES: $268,673 over 2y, 3.1% of budgetFANS OF VALLEY FIELD: $254,222 over 1y, 21% of budgetMUSKEGON AREA FIRST: $233,550 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetWEST MICHIGAN CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE: $45,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetWEST MICHIGAN CENTER FOR ARTS & TECHNOLOGY: $41,040 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetGRAND RAPIDS URBAN LEAGUE: $36,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetBLUE LAKE FINE ARTS CAMP: $32,021 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetWyoming Moose Lodge 763: $30,000 over 2y, 6.3% of budgetMICHIGAN TECH ENTERPRISE CORPORATION: $28,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetLANSING 501: $28,000 over 1y, 29% of budgetTRAVERSE CONNECT: $28,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetPREGNANCY SERVICES OF GRATIOT COUNTY: $25,000 over 1y, 40% of budgetCOMMUNITY RECOVERY INTERNATIONAL: $25,000 over 2y, 6.0% of budgetIONIA FREE FAIR ASSOCIATION: $20,250 over 2y, 5.8% of budgetTreetops Collective: $20,000 over 1y, 2.9% 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 MECOSTA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds GRAND RAPIDS PUBLIC MUSEUM ↗
  • Who funds VIBRANT FUTURES ↗
  • Who funds FANS OF VALLEY FIELD ↗
  • Who funds MUSKEGON AREA FIRST ↗
  • Who funds TRI-COUNTY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE ↗
  • Who funds WEST MICHIGAN CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE ↗

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.

Start Garden IncMI31.5× affinity15 shared granteesties to 2 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Start Garden Inc · Steelcase Foundation · Grand Rapids Community Foundation · Douglas & Maria Devos Foundation · Greater Grand Rapids Chamber Foundation · Corewell Health Group Return · Krw Foundation · The Mercantile Bank Foundation · Frey Foundation · The Wege Foundation · Heart of West Michigan United Way · Small Business Association of Michigan

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 Right Place Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Right Place Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%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
    0get no government money at all
    5report 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.

    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 1266 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Right Place’s filings →

    More from the funding graph