Skip to content
United Way of Wexford-Missaukee Counties at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

United Way of Wexford-Missaukee Counties

To meet critical human needs that will improve the quality of life and build a better community in wexford and missaukee counties.

$30k
Granted FY2023
1
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$6k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2023.

Human Services$329kHousing & Shelter$52kPhilanthropy$35kReligion$27kYouth Development$21kEducation$21kHealth$10k
02FY2023 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $6,250, the rows itemized in this filing. The $30,000 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $23,750 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$6,250
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HABITAT FOR HUMANITY$6,250
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 (FY17–22, $314k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 93% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%STAIRCASE YOUTH SERVICES: $7k → 10%MANTON SENIOR CENTER: $8k → 13%STAIRCASE YOUTH SERVICES: $7k → 10%MANTON SENIOR CENTER: $8k → 13%STAIRCASE YOUTH SERVICES: $7k → 10%MANTON SENIOR CENTER: $7k → 13%MANTON SENIOR CENTER: $6k → 13%MANTON SENIOR CENTER: $6k → 13%CADILLAC AREA OASIS: $25k → 13%CADILLAC AREA OASIS: $25k → 13%CATHOLIC HUMAN SERVICES: $20k → 13%CADILLAC AREA OASIS: $20k → 13%CATHOLIC HUMAN SERVICES: $19k → 13%CADILLAC AREA OASIS: $18k → 13%CADILLAC AREA OASIS: $18k → 13%CATHOLIC HUMAN SERVICES: $18k → 13%CADILLAC AREA OASIS: $18k → 13%CATHOLIC HUMAN SERVICES: $16k → 13%CATHOLIC HUMAN SERVICES: $15k → 13%CATHOLIC HUMAN SERVICES: $14k → 13%CADILLAC AREA YMCA: $12k → 13%CADILLAC AREA YMCA: $11k → 13%CADILLAC AREA YMCA: $11k → 13%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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$435k · 9 repeat orgs$25k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +11% since the first grant, against -70% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2023, 9 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
2

Total granted

$435k
$19k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+11%
-70%

Still filing today

78%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
Human ServicesHealthHousing & ShelterCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • CH
    CATHOLIC HUMAN SERVICES INC
    6× · 2017–2022 · $101k · revenue +48%
  • NH
    NEW HOPE SHELTER
    4× · 2019–2022 · $46k · revenue +89%
  • MA
    Manton Area Retirees
    5× · 2017–2021 · $35k · revenue +11%

Funded once

  • SF
    STEHOUWER FREE CLINIC
    one grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue -70%
  • SA
    SALVATION ARMY SOCIAL SERVICES OF KENT COUNTY
    one grant, 2022 · $9k
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
Homeless Action Network of Detroit

Our mission is to increase awareness of the problems of people who are homeless and the development and carrying out of strategies to create permanent solutions to homelessness in our community.

Human Services
2
Caring House Inc

To promote a violence free atmosphere from domestic and sexual violence in which survivors can recognize their options to have the opportunity to continue living violence free and regain their sense of self-worth; to educate and raise…

Human Services
3
Community & Home Supports Inc

Community & home supports, inc. was founded to help people and communities address poverty and homelessness. we strive to fulfill our purpose by developing, leading, and participating in collaborative and innovative efforts that support…

Human Services
4
Christian Community Response Team

Catholic Community Response Team provides direct support and referral services to those in crisis needing emergency assistance to meet their basic needs. We do it in a manner inspired by the Gospel of Jesus. Our focus is to keep families…

Human Services
5
Michigan Home for the Armenian Aged

Our goal is to assist each person to remain as independent as possible. we wish to create an environment and atmosphere that is filled with vibrancy, pride, security and a sense of belonging.

—
6
Rochester Area Neighborhood House

Rochester area neighborhood house, inc., a nonprofit human service organization founded by communities of faith in 1968, assists our neighbors during times of hardship. we partner with the community and other social service providers to…

Human Services
7
New Hope Community Development

A neighborhood based housing and development Corporation with the purpose of revializing the detroit area, by providubg affordable housing to persons of low and moderate incomes and providing youth development and networking.

Housing & Shelter
8
Northwest Michigan Rural Housing Partnership

To help provide safe, accessible, and affordable housing in Northwest Michigan.

Housing & Shelter
9
Habitat for Humanity of Lapeer - Tuscola

To eliminate sub-standard housing and homelessness from lapeer county.

—
10
Hospice Homes of Genesee and Lapeer Counties

To provide housing and end of life care and support to terminally ill individuals.

Human Services
11
Southwest Michigan Community Action Agency

Southwest michigan community action agency's purpose is to provide assistance to low income individuals in southwest michigan

Community Improvement
12
Catholic Social Services of the Upper Peninsula Inc

Working in the spirit of Gods universal love, our mission is to nurture, stabilize and strengthen the diverse families of the Upper Peninsula Community by providing mental health and addiction counseling services, child welfare services,…

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Cadillac Area Habitat for Humanity; the most unlike its peers is Manton Area Retirees. 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

10 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. 10 of the 13 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)
10/10
Grantees still filing
7/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CADILLAC AREA OASISFAMILY RESOURCE: $124,000 · Human ServicesCADILLAC AREA OASISFAMILY RESOURCECATHOLIC HUMAN SERVICES INC: $100,500 · Human ServicesCATHOLIC HUMAN SERVICES INCManton Area Retirees: $34,700 · Human ServicesManton Area RetireesCADILLAC AREA YMCA: $34,100 · Human ServicesCADILLAC AREA YMCASTAIRCASE YOUTH SERVICES INC: $21,000 · Human ServicesSTAIRCASE YOUTH SERVICES INCFIRST BAPTIST CHURCH: $27,000 · OtherFIRST BAPTIST …CADILLAC AREA PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT: $21,000 · OtherCADILLAC AREA …SALVATION ARMY SOCIAL SERVICES OF KENT COUNTY: $8,500 · OtherSALVATION ARMY…CADILLAC AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $6,250 · OtherCADILLAC AREA …NEW HOPE SHELTER: $45,600 · Housing & ShelterNEW HOPE S…CADILLAC AREA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $35,000 · PhilanthropyCOMMUNITY HOPE: $27,000 · Community ImprovementSTEHOUWER FREE CLINIC: $10,000 · Health
Human Services$314,300Other$62,750Housing & Shelter$45,600Philanthropy$35,000Community Improvement$27,000Health$10,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCADILLAC AREA OASISFAMILY RESOURCE: $124,000 over 6y, 2.1% of budgetCATHOLIC HUMAN SERVICES INC: $100,500 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetNEW HOPE SHELTER: $45,600 over 4y, 5.2% of budgetCADILLAC AREA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $35,000 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetManton Area Retirees: $34,700 over 5y, 10% of budgetCADILLAC AREA YMCA: $34,100 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetCOMMUNITY HOPE: $27,000 over 3y, 6.5% of budgetSTAIRCASE YOUTH SERVICES INC: $21,000 over 3y, 1.8% of budgetSTEHOUWER FREE CLINIC: $10,000 over 1y, 6.0% of budgetCADILLAC AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $6,250 over 1y, 0.8% 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.

Cadillac Area Communi…Natl Christian Charit…Amazonsmile Foundation
Cadillac Area Community FoundationMI24.2× affinity9 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Cadillac Area Community Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · 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 United Way of Wexford-Missaukee Counties funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from United Way of Wexford-Missaukee Counties. 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%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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 · 0–40%
    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 13 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on United Way of Wexford-Missaukee Counties’ 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