Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Barksdale Family Foundation

Its FY2019 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$98k
Granted FY2019
18
Grants FY2019
4
States reached
$40k
Largest
01What you fund
0192% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20182019.

Religion$86kEducation$18kHealth$14kArts & Culture$13kInternational$10kPhilanthropy$9kHousing & Shelter$8kYouth Development$3kOther$0
02FY2019 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2019

  • Under $10k16 grants · $48k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $50k
$3,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$1.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF THE GOOD SHEPHERD$40,000
KAMUKAMA FOUNDATION$10,000
NEXT STEP$8,000
HOSPICE OF MIDLAND$5,000
HOSPICE AUSTIN$5,000
DREAMLAND$5,000
DISCOVERY LAND COMPANY FOUNDATION$4,000
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN$4,000
SMILE TRAIN$3,000
COMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS$2,600
THE FRONT PORCH PROJECT$2,500
DREAMLAND FOUNDATION - NANTUCKET$2,500
NANTUCKET PRESERVATION TRUST$2,000
Individual grant recipient$1,500
SUSTAINABLE NANTUCKET$1,500
02The need
03

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 (FY18–19, $9k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%HOSPICE AUSTIN: $5k → 10%HELPING HAND HOME FOR CHILDREN: $3k → 10%THE FLATWATER FOUNDATION: $1k → 10%0%20%40%50%more need →
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.

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.

03Your edge
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.

10%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$18k · 3 repeat orgs$161k to everyone else

3 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2019, 0 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
12

Total granted

$18k
$71k

Still filing today

0%
42%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2019, 9% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $90k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19
Human ServicesPhilanthropyArts & CultureInternationalHousing & ShelterEducationOther

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

  • TF
    THE FRONT PORCH PROJECT
    2× · 2018–2019 · $8k
  • D
    DREAMLAND
    2× · 2018–2019 · $8k
  • TT
    THE TRAIL FOUNDATION
    2× · 2018–2019 · $2k

Funded once

  • GS
    GOOD SHEPHERD EPISCOPAL CHURCH
    one grant, 2018 · $40k
  • SP
    ST PAUL'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH
    one grant, 2018 · $6k
  • IL
    I LIVE HERE I GIVE HERE
    one grant, 2018 · $5k · revenue -24%

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

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.

1
Nantucket Conservation Foundation Inc

The nantucket conservation foundation owns, protects, and stewards over 9,000 acres of land and coastal shoreline, conserves nantucket's rare and significant natural resources, and engages in impactful ecological research to inform…

Environment
2
Hospice of South Texas Inc

Hospice care of terminally ill patients

3
Central Maine Healthcare Corporation

To provide exceptional healthcare services in a safe and trustful environment through the expertise, committment, and compassion of our family of caregivers.

Health
4
The Northern Michigan University Foundation

The nmu foundation will establish and foster relationships to generate resources that benefit the strategic goals of northern michigan university.

Education
5
Brighton Marine Inc

Brighton marine, inc. provides military and veteran families with comprehensive campus-based quality health care, as well as affordable and supportive housing for at-risk veterans and their families.

Health
6
Hospice Austin Fund

The fund is a type 1 supporting organization of hospice austin. assets of the fund are used for maintenance, support, and operations of hospice austin programs.

7
Union Health System

To serve our communities by provding innovative and compassionate healthcare.

Health
8
Boston Architectural College

The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.

9
Good Samaritan Hospice Inc

It is the mission of good samaritan hospice to affirm life in the midst of illness and grief. we accomplish this objective by providing quality patient care, family support, community education and counseling services through an…

Health
10
Texas Alliance for Patient Access

Preserve access to quality healthcare for all texans

Community Improvement
11
Hospice Maui Inc

To provide medical, nursing, counseling and other supportive services necessary for individuals with life-limiting illnesses and their families.

Human Services
12
Connecticut Farmland Trust Inc

Protect Connecticuts farmland for agricultural use by purchasing and accepting donations of agricultural conservation easements

Food & Nutrition

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Hospice Austin and the most unlike its peers is Kamukama Foundation. 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

13 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 13 of the 30 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
9/13
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF THE GOOD SHEPHERD — $40,000 · OtherEPISCOPAL CHURCH OF THE GOOD SHEPHERDGOOD SHEPHERD EPISCOPAL CHURCH — $40,000 · OtherGOOD SHEPHERD EPISCOPAL CHURCHTHE FRONT PORCH PROJECT — $8,000 · OtherTHE FRONT PORCH PROJECTNEXT STEP — $8,000 · OtherNEXT STEPDREAMLAND — $7,500 · OtherST PAUL'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH — $6,000 · OtherHOSPICE OF MIDLAND INC — $5,000 · Other+13 more — $27,600 · Other+13 moreKAMUKAMA FOUNDATION — $10,000 · InternationalI LIVE HERE I GIVE HERE — $5,000 · PhilanthropyTHE DISCOVERY LAND COMPANY FOUNDATION — $4,000 · PhilanthropyHOSPICE AUSTIN — $5,000 · Human ServicesHELPING HAND HOME FOR CHILDREN INC — $2,500 · Human ServicesTHE FLATWATER FOUNDATON — $1,000 · Human ServicesBREAKTHROUGH — $5,000 · EducationNANTUCKET PRESERVATION TRUST INC — $2,000 · Arts & CultureThe Ballroom Cultural Arts Foundation — $250 · Arts & CultureNANTUCKET SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION — $1,500 · Housing & Shelter
Other$142,100International$10,000Philanthropy$9,000Human Services$8,500Education$5,000Arts & Culture$2,250Housing & Shelter$1,500

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetKAMUKAMA FOUNDATION — $10,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetHOSPICE AUSTIN — $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetI LIVE HERE I GIVE HERE — $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetHOSPICE OF MIDLAND INC — $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBREAKTHROUGH — $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE DISCOVERY LAND COMPANY FOUNDATION — $4,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSMILE TRAIN INC — $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHELPING HAND HOME FOR CHILDREN INC — $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNANTUCKET PRESERVATION TRUST INC — $2,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetNANTUCKET SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION — $1,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetNANTUCKET ATHENEUM INC — $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE FLATWATER FOUNDATON — $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetThe Ballroom Cultural Arts Foundation — $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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.

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.

National Philanthropic TrustPA12.2× affinity7 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Barksdale Family 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
202122232425
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get 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 · 0–10%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 30 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph