Loading…
Loading…
Michigan · Nonprofit
Berrien Forward (Michigan) is funded by 3 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $809,750 in grants to it, the largest being MICHIGAN CIVIC ACTION FUND ($647,750). 2 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
Berrien Forward runs a healthier operating margin than half of the 1,675 civil rights nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 1,675 civil rights 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.
The funding model — what share of revenue comes from contributions, programs, investments and other sources — and whether it's shifting.
100% of Berrien Forward’s revenue is contributions — more reliant on donations than three-quarters of its peers (99% for the typical peer).
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 0 of the last 3 reported years ran a deficit.
$313k from 3 funders in 2024, up from $333k and 1 in 2022.
2 of 3 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 20% 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 Berrien Forward’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
Berrien Forward leans on a few funders — its largest provides 80% of grant income and the top three 100%; half comes from just 1 funder.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 1 funder to its left
Largest funder’s share by year: 2022 100% · 2023 82% · 2024 58% — diversifying over time.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
Berrien Forward is locally rooted: 80% of its grant income comes from Michigan funders.
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. Your 3 funders put you under-funded among the 400 organizations that share them.
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.
34% of spending goes to programs.
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 2022–2024), and the filings of 3funders 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