Skip to content
Barbara Brunckhorst Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Barbara Brunckhorst Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$23M
Granted FY2024still arriving
18
Grants FY2024still arriving
8
States reached
$22M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2022 to 2024.

Health$54MEnvironment$4.4MAnimals$1.3MScience & Tech$325kPhilanthropy$300kCivil Rights$250kEducation$200kCommunity Improvement$150kOther$0
02FY2024 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $30k
  • $50k–250k16 grants · $1.2M
  • $250k+1 grant · $22M
$75,000
Median grant
8
States reached
$426M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
VCU School of Medicine$22,000,000
Richmond Animal Welfare Foundation$100,000
Wildlife Center of Virginia$100,000
Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors$100,000
VA Institute Marine Science Foundat$100,000
Espanola Humane$90,000
James River Association$75,000
REPRO-Rising Virginia Foundation$75,000
Partnership Project Inc$75,000
Environmental Law Alliance Worldwid$75,000
Union of Concerned Scientists$75,000
Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas$75,000
Virginia Conservation Network$50,000
Dogwood Alliance$50,000
Partnership for Smarter Growth$50,000
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 (FY22–24, $200k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%American Red Cross: $50k → 14%Partnership for Smarter Growth: $50k → 22%Partnership for Smarter Growth: $50k → 22%Partnership for Smarter Growth: $50k → 22%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.

Which US states its grants reach

NY
MA
OR
CA
VA
MD
NM
NC
DC
TX
FL
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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$57M · 17 repeat orgs$3.7M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +22% since the first grant, against +9% for those funded once.

17 repeat relationships: 14 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
10

Total granted

$57M
$3.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+22%
+9%

Still filing today

76%
90%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $225k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24
EnvironmentAnimalsInternationalEducationHuman ServicesHealthOther
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

  • TW
    THE WILDLIFE CENTER OF VIRGINIA
    3× · 2022–2024 · $300k · revenue +70%
  • RA
    RICHMOND ANIMAL WELFARE FOUNDATION
    3× · 2022–2024 · $300k · revenue +22%
  • EV
    ESPANOLA VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY
    3× · 2022–2024 · $240k · revenue +127%

Funded once

  • SC
    SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $1.3M · revenue -64%
  • SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER
    one grant, 2022 · $600k · revenue -30%
  • EARTHJUSTICEgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $500k · revenue +26%
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
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
2
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
3
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
4
Washington Forest Law Center

Dedicated to protecting the world's natural environment on behalf of the public by serving as a public interest law firm. refer to schedule o, part iii, line 4a, for list of litigated cases or advocacy work.

—
5
Alliance for the Shenandoah Valley

Alliance for the shenandoah valley informs and engages people to protect the natural resources, cultural heritages, and rural character of our region.

Community Improvement
6
Friends of the Earth

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…

Environment
7
Terraset

Terraset uses philanthropic capital to purchase permanent, high-quality carbon removal. we pool donations from individuals, foundations, family offices, and donor advised funds, and make strategic purchases of high-quality carbon removal…

Environment
8
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
9
National Caucus of Environmental Legislators

The national caucus of environmental legislators empowers a nonpartisan network of legislative champions to protect, conserve, and improve the natural and human environment.

Education
10
Asociacion Interamericana Para La Defensa Del Ambiente

To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.

Crime & Legal
11
Nrdc Action Fund Inc

To build political support for advancing the goals of the natural resources defense council.

—
12
Virginia Environmental Endowment

The endowment's mission is to improve the quality of the environment by using its capital, expertise, and resources to fund projects and programs that encourage all sectors to work together to prevent pollution, improve water quality,…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated; the most unlike its peers is Partnership for Smarter Growth. 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

23 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. 23 of the 31 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
23/23
Grantees still filing
13/23
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

VCU School of Medicine: $54,000,000 · OtherVCU School of Medicine+9 more: $1,715,000 · OtherSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $1,300,000 · EnvironmentEARTHJUSTICE: $500,000 · EnvironmentTHE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $400,000 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $250,000 · EnvironmentThe Partnership Project Inc: $225,000 · EnvironmentJAMES RIVER ASSOCIATION: $225,000 · EnvironmentCHESAPEAKE BAY FOUNDATION INC: $200,000 · EnvironmentDogwood Alliance Inc: $150,000 · EnvironmentVIRGINIA CONSERVATION NETWORK: $150,000 · EnvironmentCAPITAL REGION LAND CONSERVANCY INC: $150,000 · EnvironmentTHE WILDLIFE CENTER OF VIRGINIA: $300,000 · AnimalsRICHMOND ANIMAL WELFARE FOUNDATION: $300,000 · AnimalsESPANOLA VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY: $240,000 · AnimalsROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $300,000 · PhilanthropyVIRGINIA INSTITUTE OF MARINE SCIENCE FDN: $200,000 · EducationSOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL FOUNDATION: $100,000 · EducationTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC: $225,000 · InternationalALLIANCE FOR OPEN SOCIETY INT'L INC: $50,000 · InternationalPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER TEXAS INC: $225,000 · HealthPartnership for Smarter Growth: $150,000 · Human ServicesAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $50,000 · Human Services
Other$55,715,000Environment$3,550,000Animals$840,000Philanthropy$300,000Education$300,000International$275,000Health$225,000Human Services$200,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $1,300,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetSOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER: $600,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetEARTHJUSTICE: $500,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $400,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE WILDLIFE CENTER OF VIRGINIA: $300,000 over 3y, 3.8% of budgetROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $300,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetRICHMOND ANIMAL WELFARE FOUNDATION: $300,000 over 3y, 12% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $250,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetESPANOLA VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY: $240,000 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC: $225,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL LAW ALLIANCE WORLDWIDE: $225,000 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetThe Partnership Project Inc: $225,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER TEXAS INC: $225,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetJAMES RIVER ASSOCIATION: $225,000 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetCHESAPEAKE BAY FOUNDATION INC: $200,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetVIRGINIA INSTITUTE OF MARINE SCIENCE FDN: $200,000 over 2y, 5.1% of budgetDogwood Alliance Inc: $150,000 over 3y, 1.9% of budgetPartnership for Smarter Growth: $150,000 over 3y, 64% of budgetVIRGINIA CONSERVATION NETWORK: $150,000 over 3y, 5.3% of budgetCAPITAL REGION LAND CONSERVANCY INC: $150,000 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetSOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetALLIANCE FOR OPEN SOCIETY INT'L INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

Good Shepherd Fund-Im…The Community Foundat…The David and Lucile …The Nature ConservancyVanguard Charitable E…Network for GoodDonor Advised Charita…The Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Good Shepherd Fund-Ima-MainVA15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 9 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Good Shepherd Fund-Ima-Main · The Community Foundation Inc · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · The Nature Conservancy · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Barbara Brunckhorst Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Barbara Brunckhorst Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Chesapeake Bay Foundation Inc: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Barbara Brunckhorst Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Barbara Brunckhorst 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.

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 31 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Barbara Brunckhorst’s 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