How much did Charles & Margery Barancik Foundation grant in FY2024?

Human Services$8.9MHealth$8.2MEducation$7.6MPhilanthropy$6.3MCommunity Improvement$5.0MEnvironment$3.9MFood & Nutrition$3.7MArts & Culture$2.6MOther$0

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

As a private foundation, Barancik files no mission narrative or Schedule O. Its identity is read from where the money goes and how the grants are worded. Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

Signatures few funders share — Education & the educator pipeline · Local journalism · Capacity building

Each cell is that theme’s share of the year’s giving · ⚡ ringed cells mark a flagged jump.

03FY2024 · 164 orgs + 43 individuals

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

Grant-size mix · FY2020–FY2024

FY20

36%

64%

$4.2M

FY21

47%

53%

$11.6M

FY22

33%

58%

$25.2M

FY23

30%

62%

$24.6M

FY24

21%

74%

$26.2M

Under $10k$10k–50k$50k–250k$250k+

In FY2020, 64% of your dollars went out in $250k+ checks; by FY2024 that was 74%. Each year’s bar is its own 100%, so the bands show the mix, not the total.

$16,000

Median grant

States reached

$701M

Total assets

Largest grants
Recipient	Amount
Gulf Coast Community Foundation	$2,500,000
Community News Collaborative	$1,100,000
Forty Carrots Family Center	$1,000,000
Sarasota County Schools	$972,192
All Faiths Food Bank	$943,568
Children First	$900,000
Boys & Girls Clubs of Sarasota and DeSoto Counties	$900,000
The Bay Park Conservancy	$800,000
YMCA of Southwest Florida	$760,507
Safe Children Coalition	$750,000
YMCA of Southwest Florida	$658,928
Second Heart Homes	$650,000
Ringling College of Art and Design	$550,000
The Greater Sarasota Chamber of Commerce Foundation	$550,000
Resilient Retreat	$444,869
43 grants to individuals (names withheld)	$380,744

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY20–24, $8.2M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 91% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

The hardship those neighborhoods carry, beyond income:

Adults without health insurance:reaches 40.1% in some neighborhoods (typically 11.7%)(CDC, modeled)
Eviction pressure:up to 27.6 filings per 100 renter households in the hardest-hit areas(Eviction Lab, 2018)
Food access:97 of 800 neighborhoods are USDA-designated food deserts(USDA, 2019)

Hardest-hit ZIP codes — share of households below a basic cost of living

32304 76.5%33613 74.6%33605 71.4%32310 70%33612 69.7%33714 68.9%

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.

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 5% of Charles & Margery Barancik Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 95% of the giving stays in FL; read by stated purpose it is 93% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

Charles & Margery Barancik Foundationlessmore of its giving

Placed by recipient address

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge

The orgs you fund vs the ones you don’t

You skew toward the sturdier end of a fragile field.

The organisations you back are larger and somewhat healthier than the comparable nonprofits nearby you don't fund, though the gap is modest: 69% of those you fund still carry a fragility flag, against 78% of the unfunded.

The kind of organization you back

81% of the organizations you back live mainly on donations, against 41% of the comparable nonprofits nearby you don’t fund. 31% of the ones you pick are financially resilient, against 27% of that field, and fewer show the warning signs below.

What they work on

Arts & Culture13% vs 7%

The nearby nonprofits you don’t fund are concentrated in Religion, Recreation & Sports.

How they hold up

Run recurring deficits23% vs 37%
Burning through reserves8% vs 19%
Less than a month of cash6% vs 12%
Lean on a single income source58% vs 46%

you fund (113) you don’t (3012)· share of each group

You fund (48)You don’t (441)

Median size (revenue)$3.0M$783k

Operating margin14%5%

Financially fragile69%78%

Comparison vs unfunded, size- and cause-matched nonprofits in your county. Association, not proof of cause.

repeat funding

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.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$72M · 128 repeat orgs$14M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +20% since the first grant, against +13% for the ones you funded once.

128 repeat relationships — 91 still active in FY2024, 37 since wound down; 75 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

Of your 132 multi-year relationships, 32 repeat the same amount every year (7% of multi-year dollars), the pattern of a standing commitment. The rest vary year to year. Grant terms aren’t stated in the filing; this is inferred from the payment pattern.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

128

177

Total granted

$72M

$9.7M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+20%

+13%

Still filing today

85%

32%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 82% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4.1M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Human ServicesEducationArts & CultureHealthEnvironmentPhilanthropyOther

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

ALL FAITHS FOOD BANK INC
5× · 2020–2024 · $3.7M · revenue +12%
TF
THE FLORIDA CENTER FOR EARLY CHILDHOOD INC
5× · 2020–2024 · $2.6M · revenue +68%
SAFE CHILDREN COALITION INC
5× · 2020–2024 · $2.4M · revenue +76%

Funded once

F1
FIRST 1000 DAYS
one grant, 2021 · $500k
P1
PROJECT 180 SARASOTA INC
one grant, 2023 · $450k · revenue -37% · 53% of their budget
IG
Individual grant recipient
one grant, 2020 · $406k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

Activities, outputs, outcomes

Most can say what their work is for. Few can show it changed. Click an area to step through it.

Of 44 organizations, 5 show a change. The rest report what they did, or only what they hope it’s for.

Click an area to read it, and step through its organizations.

Read from 44 of the 75 organizations you fund across these 5 areas— those you fund most heavily — in their own program-service reporting. Achievements are the organizations’ own.

case studies

Two relationships, up close

One you funded repeatedly and one you funded once, each traced through its own filings and the public record.

The Bay Park Conservancy Inc

Conviction

A civic bet that kept growing

The Barancik Foundation has backed Bay Park Conservancy across three grants from 2022 to 2024, contributing $1,830,000 toward a 53-acre signature bayfront park on Sarasota Bay. Over that period the Conservancy's revenue grew at a compound annual rate of 96%, and since Phase 1 opened in October 2022 the park has recorded more than 730,000 visitors and 44,000 free community programmes. Phase 2 — a 14-acre, $65 million expansion — broke ground in summer 2024, backed by $48 million in City of Sarasota TIF bonds.

3× · 2022–2024

Funded

$1.8M

You committed

Peak share of budget

+555%

Their revenue since

TIKKUN HAYAM-REPAIR THE SEA INC

Funded once · graduated

One early grant, steady growth since

A single $250,000 grant in 2022 — roughly 79% of Tikkun HaYam's revenue that year — was an early backing of this faith-rooted ocean-conservation nonprofit, which has since grown its revenue by 58% and continued to file. Since then, Tikkun HaYam has expanded from scuba certification for college students to an international Jewish waterfront cleanup event, Alternative Spring Break service-learning trips in the Florida Keys, and a Blue/Green Initiative helping faith communities move away from single-use plastics.

When you stepped in · 2022

$320k

their revenue

$250k= 78% of it

once

Latest filing · 2024

$501k+57%

grown on its own, no further grants

2024 · what they did next

Offered college students Alternative Spring Break community-service learning trips in the Florida Keys.

projects.propublica.org

Trajectories are each organization’s own subsequent IRS filings; milestones are from the public record, linked to source. Revenue is the organization’s whole income from every source, not a return on these grants: we date what happened after a grant, and do not claim the grant caused it.

04Your field

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.

Southwest Florida Community Foundation Inc

See schedule ocollaboratory is a community foundation with an evolved mission committed to coordinating the solving of southwest florida's major social problems by 2040. since our founding in 1976, we have been supporting local causes and…

Philanthropy

Suncoast Workforce Board Inc

The organization's mission is to identify and invest in workforce development solutions to meet the needs of manatee and sarasota counties.

Employment

Florida Community Health Centers Inc

Florida community health centers, inc. (fchc) is a federally qualified health center serving medically needy populations in south florida, with an emphasis on serving rural and farm worker communities.

—

Economic Development Corporation of Sarasota County

To create and foster economic opportunities in collaboration with community and regional partners to diversify, grow and sustain our economy while enhancing our unique, natural and cultural environment.

Community Improvement

Realtor Association of Sarasota and Manatee Inc

The mission of the realtor association of sarasota and manatee is to advance members' professionalism through delivery of education and resources, and to advocate for real estate in the communities served.

—

Sarasota City Foundation Inc

Philanthropy

Sarasota Medical Pregnancy Center Inc

To offer cost free pregnancy-related medical services, behavioral and social services and general resources that can benefit the mother and/or father from pre-birth to post-birth. from the pregnancy test to the baby's first birthday we…

Health

Mental Health Collaborative of Indian River County Inc

Our mission is to establish a continuum of care for mental health made up of private and public funders, mental health providers and individuals who work in collaboration to increase access, decrease duplication, and facilitate community…

Health

Sarasota Convention & Visitors Bureau Inc

Advancement of and development of tourism and the service of the tourism industry within the county of sarasota, florida

—

Jewish Housing Council Foundation Inc

The organization provides financial support to sarasota-manatee jewish housing council, inc., a not-for-profit provider of independent living, assisted living, skilled nursing and other services for elderly individuals from sarasota and…

—

Florida Alliance of Children's Councils & Trusts Inc

To promote policies that build effective primary prevention and early intervention systems of support for florida's children and families by engaging and enhancing the collective strengths of the individual children's services councils of…

—

University of Florida Health Corporation

UF Health's mission is to promote health through outstanding and high-quality patient care, innovative and rigorous education in the health professions and biomedical sciences, and high-impact research across the spectrum of basic,…

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Manatee Community Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is The Marc & Jennifer Fleischer Family Charitable Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 29 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.9% lost their exemption, against 16% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.9%2/210

the rest of the field

16%

6,343/40,489

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.

06the grantee network

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

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 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 199 of the 385 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.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

194/199

Grantees still filing

120/199

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$40,200,169Health$12,401,060Human Services$11,700,063Education$8,301,200Philanthropy$6,598,265Arts & Culture$6,029,586Community Improvement$4,892,382

Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.

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.

17 internal · 2 shared anchors

Your portfolio is already a network

Harvest House partners with the Community Foundation of Sarasota County and the Lee Wetherington Foundation to purchase and renovate housing units for homeless military veteran families and chronically homeless families in the Newtown area. It’s one of 17 direct ties among 28 of your grantees, who also cluster around 2 shared regional anchors.

Ties are read from news and organization websites, so they’re directional, not exhaustive; each links to its source.

Grantees connected

Grantee↔grantee ties

Shared anchors (2+ grantees)

External links

Tap any organization to trace its collaborations — shared anchors pull toward the center

min. connectionstheme24 shown · 19 ties

grantee you fund external partner named by both stated inferred

Tap any organization in the graph to trace its collaborations — or start with the strongest ties below.

Strongest grantee↔grantee ties

↔
explicit Joint program
↔
explicit Funding
↔
explicit Funding
↔
explicit Funding
↔
explicit Joint program

Anchors several grantees share

5 grantees
2 grantees

Joint program 40Funding 15Affiliation 9Referral network 6Coalition 4

Partnerships are LLM-extracted from news and organisation websites, not from tax filings — directional, not exhaustive. Each edge links to its source; corroborated edges were named independently by both organisations.

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.

The Community Foundation of Sarasota Co IncFL177.2× affinity122 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Community Foundation of Sarasota Co Inc · Gulf Coast Community Foundation Inc · William G and Marie Selby Foundation Inc · Manatee Community Foundation Inc · The Louis and Gloria Flanzer Philanthropic Trust · United Way Suncoast Inc · Msc Foundation Inc · The Tillie Jennie & Harold Schwartz Foundation Inc · Wilson - Wood Foundation Inc · Harry Sudakoff Foundation Inc · The Mary Parker Foundation 157823-000 · Sisterhood For Good Inc

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 Charles & Margery Barancik Foundation 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24’25

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

90get no government money at all

48report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)

4rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–25

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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Charles & Margery Barancik Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Charles & Margery Barancik Foundation 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.

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 camps

funders cluster by geography, not ideology

By state

where grant money is based, and what stays home

State money flows

the interactive map of money crossing state lines