· Private foundation
Trapp Family Foundation Inc
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.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k26 grants · $54k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $51k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| REVIVE & THRIVE PROJECT | $11,000 |
| LAND AND SEA FOR ALL FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| HUNTINGTON'S DISEASE SOCIETY OF AMERICA | $10,000 |
| PHYSICIANS COMMITTEE FOR RESPONSIBLE MEDICINE | $10,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MICHIGAN | $10,000 |
| AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF MICHIGAN | $9,750 |
| CANAL ALLIANCE | $5,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| LIGHTHOUSE OF OAKLAND COUNTY | $3,500 |
| THE MENTAL HEALTH FOUNDATION OF WEST MICHIGAN | $3,000 |
| EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE | $3,000 |
| HRDC | $3,000 |
| WEST SHORE FAMILY SUPPORT | $2,500 |
| FARMINGTONFARMINGTON HILLS EDUCATION FOUNDATION | $2,000 |
| THE IMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER | $1,250 |
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 (FY17–25, $97k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 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 +49% since the first grant, against +26% for the ones you funded once.
37 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2025, 24 since wound down; 18 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, 59% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $43k 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
- HFHABITAT FOR HUMANITY8× · 2017–2024 · $101k · revenue +69%
Physicians Committee for Responsible Med9× · 2017–2025 · $100k · revenue +55%
UNITED WAY FOR SOUTHEASTERN MICHIGAN8× · 2017–2024 · $98k · revenue +55%
Funded once
- KCKENT CAREER TECH CENTERone grant, 2018 · $8k
- THTAMALPAIS HIGH BOOSTER CLUBgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $7k · revenue +49%
- NINutritionfactsorg Incone grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue +20%
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.
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
To eliminate disparities in health care access and outcomes by providing superior quality health and human services through an integrated world-class delivery system for latino, multi-ethnic underserved communities in southern california.
The fsmb serves as the voice for state medical boards, supporting them through education, assessment, research and advocacy while providing services and initiatives that promote patient safety, quality health care and regulatory best…
Marin humane transforms lives through exceptional animal care, humane education, and advocacy. every day, marin humane inspires compassion and positive relationships between people and animals.
As a national leader in environmental health research and advocacy, toxic- free future uses the power of science, education, and activism, to drive strong laws and corporate responsibility that protect the health of all people and the…
Engage actively and continuously in medical research, education and training in the practice of medicine in conjunction with the department of family medicine of the indiana university school of medicine and indiana university…
To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.
We pursue bold solutions to end animal agriculture and foster just and compassionate vegan living through education and policy advocacy.
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
Animal outlook is a national animal protection organization working to end the abuse of farmed animals using a variety of strategies, including investigations, legal advocacy, corporate and food system reform, and vegan outreach.
Arbor research collaborative for health is committed to improving patient care through research that shapes medical policies and practice. in particular, arbor research conducts health outcomes research on chronic disease and end-stage…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Alternatives for Girls and the most unlike its peers is Dr Gary Burnstein Community Health Clinic. 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 34 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% 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.
48 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. 48 of the 83 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 LIGHTHOUSE OF OAKLAND COUNTY ↗
- Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ↗
- Who funds Physicians Committee for Responsible Med ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY FOR SOUTHEASTERN MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds HUNTINGTON'S DISEASE SOCIETY OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds Revive & Thrive Project ↗
- Who funds TAM HIGH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
- Who funds Land and Sea for All Foundation ↗
- Who funds GRAND RAPIDS YOUTH COMMONWEALTH INC ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds Bridge the Gap College Prep ↗
- Who funds TAMALPAIS HIGH BOOSTER CLUB ↗
- Who funds Fruit Tree Planting Foundation ↗
- Who funds 10000 DEGREES ↗
- Who funds ALTERNATIVES FOR GIRLS ↗
- Who funds DR GARY BURNSTEIN COMMUNITY HEALTH CLINIC ↗
- Who funds Nutritionfactsorg Inc ↗
- Who funds COVENANT HOUSE MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds CANAL ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds CASS COMMUNITY SOCIAL SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds HANDICAP INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds MENTAL HEALTH FOUNDATION OF WEST MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE ↗
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: United Way for Southeastern Michigan · Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan · Grand Rapids Community Foundation · Dte Energy Foundation · Michigan Health Endowment Fund · Ge Aerospace Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Verizon Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program
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 Trapp Family Foundation Inc 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Trapp Family Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Trapp Family Foundation Inc 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.