Skip to content
Birdsong Trust Fund at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

Birdsong Trust Fund

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$104k
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$40k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Education$240kHealth$164kRecreation & Sports$147kArts & Culture$137kHousing & Shelter$75kPhilanthropy$21kYouth Development$14kEnvironment$13kOther$0
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k5 grants · $21k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $83k
$8,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NANSEMOND SUFFOLK ACADEMY$40,000
SUFFOLK YOUTH ATHLETIC ASSOC$25,000
WESTERN TIDEWATER FREE CLINIC$17,591
NANSEMOND RIVER PRESERVATION$8,000
HOPE FOR SUFFOLK$7,375
PROJECT LIFESAVER$3,547
SUFFOLK MEALS ON WHEELS$1,296
SUFFOLK CHEER FUND$1,000
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 (FY17–24, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 66% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%PROJECT LIFESAVER: $4k → 9%THE CHILDREN'S CENTER: $5k → 12%THE CHILDRENS CENTER: $2k → 12%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.
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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$789k · 15 repeat orgs$79k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +65% since the first grant, against +40% for those funded once.

15 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
12

Total granted

$789k
$68k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+65%
+40%

Still filing today

73%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $11k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesEducationHealthRecreation & SportsHousing & ShelterArts & CultureOther
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

  • NS
    NANSEMOND SUFFOLK ACADEMY ASSOCIATION INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $191k · revenue +76%
  • SY
    SUFFOLK YOUTH ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION INC
    6× · 2017–2024 · $133k · revenue +65%
  • FI
    FORKIDS INC
    4× · 2017–2020 · $75k · revenue +48%

Funded once

  • PD
    PAUL D CAMP COMMUNITY COLLEGE
    one grant, 2018 · $24k
  • SN
    Suffolk Nansemond Historical Society
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue -22%
  • BC
    BENNETT'S CREEK LITTLE LEAGUE
    one grant, 2023 · $10k
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
Suffolk Education Foundation

Is to support suffolk public schools by connecting the community's talents and resources to expand educational opportunities for students and staff.

Education
2
Southampton County Historical Society
Arts & Culture
3
Portsmouth Reads
Education
4
Suffolk County Historical Society

A historical society that provides educational programs, a museum, and a library for the benefit of students, researchers and the general public.

Arts & Culture
5
Children's Advocacy Center of Suffolk County Inc

To unite public, private and community partners to ensure safety, healing and justice for children and families impacted by violence, exploitation and abuse.

Crime & Legal
6
Suffolk Festivals Inc

To advance and promote the civic betterment and general welfare of the City of Suffolk and exploit the natural resources and opportunities of the community, its trade and commerce, and its educational life, by providing recreation and…

—
7
Isle of Wight County Museum Foundation Inc
Arts & Culture
8
Cuttyhunk Historical Society Inc
Arts & Culture
9
Suffolk Community College Foundationinc

The suffolk community college foundation's mission is to support student access to quality education and vocational skill training by providing scholarships, emergency loans and funding for program development. additionally, the foundation…

—
10
Portsmouth Humane Society Inc

Provide shelter, care, and treatment to homeless animals in the city of portsmouth community through permanent adoptions, spay/neuter programs, and community education.

Animals
11
Rotary Club of Suffolk Charitable Foundation

Support of local and international charities

Philanthropy
12
Suffern Free Library

Operation of a public library

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Suffolk Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Suffolk Youth Athletic Association Inc. 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

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

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 17 of the 30 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
14/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SUFFOLK CENTER FOR CULTURAL ARTS: $112,640 · OtherSUFFOLK CENTER FOR CULTURAL ARTSIndividual grant recipient: $53,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientPAUL D CAMP COMMUNITY COLLEGE: $24,000 · OtherPAUL D CAMP COMMUNITY COLLEGEALL DISTRICT READS INC: $20,000 · OtherALL DISTRICT READS INCHEALTHY SUFFOLK: $14,000 · Other+19 more: $85,725 · Other+19 moreNANSEMOND SUFFOLK ACADEMY ASSOCIATION INC: $191,000 · EducationNANSEMOND SUFFOLK ACADEM…WESTERN TIDEWATER FREE CLINIC INC: $146,008 · HealthWESTERN TIDEWATER …SUFFOLK YOUTH ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION INC: $133,000 · Recreation & SportsSUFFOLK YOUTH AT…FORKIDS INC: $75,000 · Housing & ShelterFORKIDS I…SUFFOLK FOUNDATION: $20,000 · PhilanthropyNANSEMOND RIVER PRESERVATION ALLIANCE: $13,400 · Environment
Other$309,365Education$191,000Health$146,008Recreation & Sports$133,000Housing & Shelter$75,000Philanthropy$20,000Environment$13,400

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNANSEMOND SUFFOLK ACADEMY ASSOCIATION INC: $191,000 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetWESTERN TIDEWATER FREE CLINIC INC: $146,008 over 8y, 0.9% of budgetSUFFOLK YOUTH ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION INC: $133,000 over 6y, 14% of budgetFORKIDS INC: $75,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetSUFFOLK FOUNDATION: $20,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetALL DISTRICT READS INC: $20,000 over 2y, 8.8% of budgetNANSEMOND RIVER PRESERVATION ALLIANCE: $13,400 over 3y, 5.1% of budgetSuffolk Nansemond Historical Society: $10,000 over 1y, 8.2% of budgetSUFFOLK ART LEAGUE: $9,240 over 4y, 2.3% of budgetHOPE FOR SUFFOLK: $7,375 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetSuffolk Cheer Fund: $7,000 over 7y, 2.5% of budgetTHE CHILDREN'S CENTER: $6,850 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetPROJECT LIFESAVER INC: $3,547 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS OF SUFFOLK & ISLE OF WIGHT INC: $3,296 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetRIDDICKS FOLLY: $3,200 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetSuffolk Christian Fellowship Center: $3,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetSUFFOLK CHRISTIAN ACADEMY: $2,300 over 2y, 0.1% 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 NANSEMOND SUFFOLK ACADEMY ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds WESTERN TIDEWATER FREE CLINIC INC ↗
  • Who funds SUFFOLK YOUTH ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds FORKIDS INC ↗
  • Who funds SUFFOLK FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds ALL DISTRICT READS INC ↗
  • Who funds NANSEMOND RIVER PRESERVATION ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds Suffolk Nansemond Historical Society ↗
  • Who funds SUFFOLK ART LEAGUE ↗
  • Who funds HOPE FOR SUFFOLK ↗
  • Who funds Suffolk Cheer Fund ↗
  • Who funds THE CHILDREN'S CENTER ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT LIFESAVER INC ↗
  • Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS OF SUFFOLK & ISLE OF WIGHT INC ↗
  • Who funds RIDDICKS FOLLY ↗
  • Who funds Suffolk Christian Fellowship Center ↗
  • Who funds SUFFOLK CHRISTIAN ACADEMY ↗

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.

Birdsong Charitable F…Suffolk FoundationObici Healthcare Foun…Mary C Henninger Hadd…The Pruden FoundationThe Blocker FoundationHampton Roads Communi…Townebank FoundationCommunity Action Coal…Richard Bennett TrustBeazley Foundation In…United Way of South H…
Birdsong Charitable FoundationVA28.4× affinity11 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Birdsong Charitable Foundation · Suffolk Foundation · Obici Healthcare Foundation Inc · Mary C Henninger Haddad and Louis S Haddad Foundation Inc · The Pruden Foundation · The Blocker Foundation · Hampton Roads Community Foundation · Townebank Foundation · Community Action Coalition · Richard Bennett Trust · Beazley Foundation Incorporated · United Way of South Hampton Roads

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 Birdsong Trust Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Birdsong Trust Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    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 30 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 Birdsong’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