Loading…
Loading…
Michigan · Nonprofit
Active Against ALS (Michigan) is funded by 10 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $219,903 in grants to it, the largest being JAMES A AND FAITH KNIGHT FOUNDATION ($87,380). 3 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
Active Against ALS has grown faster than three-quarters of the 12,769 health nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 12,769 health nonprofits $100k–$1M, FY2024
Revenue, expenses and net assets — each indexed to 100 at its first filing year, so you read the trajectory, not the magnitude. The shaded band is where the middle 50% of its peers' revenue would sit, given their growth.
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 3 of the last 5 reported years ran a deficit.
$13k from 1 funders in 2024, up from $67k and 3 in 2017.
5 of 10 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 59% of grant dollars received. That money is really individual donors directing a sponsor; the institutions to cultivate are the non-DAF funders.
From the IRS filings of Active Against ALS’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
Active Against ALS leans on a few funders — its largest provides 40% of grant income and the top three 91%; half comes from just 2 funders.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 2 funders to its left
Largest funder’s share by year: 2017 72% · 2018 43% · 2019 97% · 2020 65% · 2021 98% · 2022 80% · 2023 62% · 2024 100% — growing more concentrated.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
25% of Active Against ALS's funders are still giving 3 years after their first grant; 30% give in more than one year at all.
Share of funders still giving k years after their first recorded grant, pooled across every acquisition cohort. A funder counts as retained in a year only if it made a grant that year.
Active Against ALS draws 60% of its grant income from funders outside Michigan — its reputation reaches beyond the state, across 8 states in all.
In-state vs out-of-state, by year
Grantmakers that don’t fund you yet, surfaced two ways: they back organizations that share your funders, or their grantees resemble your mission. The ones both signals agree on come first.
From the co-funder graph (funders backing at least two comparable organizations, shrunk for grantee count, donor-advised and mega-funds excluded) and the universe embeddings. A research starting point; overlap is association, not a guarantee of fit.
Nonprofits whose mission and program text most resemble this one, by semantic similarity over the universe of US filings — the closest peers, and often the clearest route to shared or prospective funders.
Read directly from this organization’s own Form 990, as neutral context.
75%
Share of support from the public (Schedule A) — the basis for its public-charity status.
Operates in 1 state
Every figure is read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML — this organization’s own return for FY2024 (financials across 2020–2024), and the filings of 10funders that report grants to it. “On record” means captured in the filings we have parsed — a funder that does not e-file, or whose grant detail is not itemized, will not appear. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind. view filing