Skip to content

· Private foundation

Beardsley Mary W Tr Uw Art 30

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$44k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$13k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Human Services$133kHealth$42kHousing & Shelter$42kReligion$42kCrime & Legal$35k
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $31k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $13k
$6,283
Median grant
1
States reached
$707k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LIFEBRIDGE COMMUNITY SERVICES$12,553
OLIVET CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH$6,283
THE CENTER FOR FAMILY JUSTICE$6,283
BRIDGEPORT HOSPITAL$6,283
BURROUGHS HOME FUND$6,283
HALL NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE INC$6,283
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.

None of its grants could be placed against low income need for this view.

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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$293k · 7 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
0

Total granted

$293k
$0

Still filing today

57%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human 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

  • BH
    BRIDGEPORT HOSPITAL
    9× · 2017–2025 · $42k · revenue +77%
  • HN
    HALL NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $42k · revenue +83%
  • TC
    THE CENTER FOR FAMILY JUSTICE INC
    7× · 2019–2025 · $35k · revenue +66%

Funded once

    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
    04the grantee network

    4 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. 4 of the 7 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.

    0
    Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
    2
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    4/4
    Grantees still filing
    3/4
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    LIFEBRIDGE COMMUNITY SERVICES INC: $83,514 · Human ServicesLIFEBRIDGE COMMUNITY SERVICES INCHALL NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE INC: $41,802 · Human ServicesHALL NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE INCTHE CENTER FOR FAMILY JUSTICE INC: $34,517 · Human ServicesTHE CENTER FOR FAMILY JUSTICE INCOLIVET CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH: $41,802 · OtherOLIVET CONGREGATIONAL CHURCHBURROUGHS HOME FUND: $41,802 · OtherBURROUGHS HOME FUNDCTR FR WOMEN & FAM E FAIRFIELD: $7,285 · OtherCTR FR WOMEN & FAM E FAIRFIELDBRIDGEPORT HOSPITAL: $41,802 · HealthBRIDGEPORT HOSPI…
    Human Services$159,833Other$90,889Health$41,802

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

    25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetLIFEBRIDGE COMMUNITY SERVICES INC: $83,514 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetBRIDGEPORT HOSPITAL: $41,802 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetHALL NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE INC: $41,802 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CENTER FOR FAMILY JUSTICE INC: $34,517 over 7y, 0.2% 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.

    • Who funds LIFEBRIDGE COMMUNITY SERVICES INC ↗
    • Who funds BRIDGEPORT HOSPITAL ↗
    • Who funds HALL NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE INC ↗
    • Who funds THE CENTER FOR FAMILY JUSTICE INC ↗

    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.

    Estate of Benjamin B LewisCT13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: Estate of Benjamin B Lewis · The Bridgeport Rotary Club Foundation Inc · Fairfield County's Community Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc

    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 Beardsley Mary W Tr Uw Art 30 funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Beardsley Mary W Tr Uw Art 30. Bigger dots raise more.

    2024
    ’20’21’22’23’24’25
    no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 32%
    • The Center for Family Justice Inc: 49% of income from government
    • Lifebridge Community Services Inc: 32% of income from government
    • Hall Neighborhood House Inc: 27% of income from government
    • Bridgeport Hospital: 0% of income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    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.

    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 7 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Beardsley Mary W Tr Uw Art 30’s filings →

    More from the funding graph