Loading…
· Private foundation
BR FOUNDATION
This foundation accepts unsolicited grant applications.
$81k
Granted FY2024
15
Grants
4
Communities
$21k
Largest
01What you fund
01
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 80% of BR FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.
02beneath the categories
Past the labels — and the year it shifted
Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.
…and in their own words, year by year
2019
researchlaportegen
2020
—
2021
health
2022
—
2023
—
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2024 · 15 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k13 grants · $49k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $31k
$4,050
Median grant
4
States reached
$1.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
- VETERAN CAR DONATIONS$21,000
- INDIAN AMERICAN CULTURAL CTR$10,453
- PROCURE$9,550
- SALAVATION ARMY$8,315
- HABITAT FOR HUMANITY$8,000
- LUBEZNIK CENTER FOR THE ARTS$5,300
- FRANCISCAN HEALTH FOUNDATION$4,095
- ASHLEY HOUSE$4,050
- FRIENDSHIP BOTANICAL GARDENS$3,550
- CENTER FOR CREATIVE SOLUTIONS$2,500
- HINDU TEMPLE OF GREATER CHICAGO$1,507
- UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS$1,000
- AP FOUNDATION$600
- CITIZENS CONCERNED FOR HOMELESS$500
- R VIDHYA AASHRAM$465
02The need
04
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 (FY19–19, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15% — the area typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. 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 line in 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, United Way ALICE — 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.
68%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$200k · 13 repeat orgs$93k to everyone else
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +197% since the first grant, against +86% for the ones you funded once.
13 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
13
26
Total granted
$200k
$57k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+197%
+86%
Still filing today
31%
23%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 54% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $37k went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
Food & NutritionHealthAnimalsHuman ServicesPhilanthropyHousing & ShelterOther
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
- FHFRANCISCAN HEALTH FOUNDATION4× · 2021–2024 · $17k · revenue +2%
- CCCITIZENS CONCERNED FOR THE HOMELESS2× · 2020–2021 · $15k · revenue +79%
- MHMICHIANA HUMANE SOCIETY2× · 2019–2020 · $14k · revenue +197%
Funded once
- SHSHIRLEY HEINZEone grant, 2019 · $8k
- LALUBEZNIK ART CENTERone grant, 2019 · $8k
- LCLAPORTE COUNTY VISITORS BUREAUone grant, 2019 · $6k
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
Meals On Wheels of Chester County
To provide nutritious meals and personal interaction to homebound adults living in chester county to help them live independently in their own homes.
Human Services
2
Meals On Wheels of Jamestown Area
Provide home delivery of meals to elderly.
Food & Nutrition
3
Meals On Wheels Inc
Provide meal delivery service to seniors and adult day program participants.
Food & Nutrition
4
Meals on Wheels of Evansville Inc
Food & Nutrition
5
Meals On Wheels People Inc
We enrich lives of seniors by providing nutritious food. (see schedule o for continuation)we also assist them in maintaining independence, provide human connections, and provide social support.
Food & Nutrition
6
Meals On Wheels of Central Alabama Inc
Meals on wheels vision is to help create a central alabama where all seniors live nourished lives with independence and dignity.
Food & Nutrition
7
Meals On Wheels of Eastern Onondaga County Inc
To enable our neighbors in eastern onondaga county to live at home with dignity and independence by providing nutritious meals and a wellness check.
Food & Nutrition
8
Project Angel Heart
Project angel heart promotes food as medicine, preparing and delivering medically tailored meals to improve health and well-being for those with life-threatening illness.
Community Improvement
9
Food From the Heart Inc
Meal delivery: our purpose is to cook nutritious, well-balanced meals and provide this food free of charge to individuals facing a health crisis in their lives.
Human Services
10
Meals on Wheels Older Adult Alternatives of
Provide nutrition services, in-home support services, information/referral, and transportation services to older adults in fairfield county
Human Services
11
Monroe County Meals On Wheels Inc
Monroe county meals on wheels provides superior nutritional support, a daily human connection, and other supportive services to the home bound so they may remain safe and independent in their homes.
—
12
Meals On Wheels of Boulder Inc
The mission of meals on wheels is to provide nutritious meals to residents of the community who need and want their services, regardless of age or income.
Food & Nutrition
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Meals On Wheels Inc and the most unlike its peers is Meals On Wheels America. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network
10 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2024.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
10/10
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Other$235,783Philanthropy$17,027Housing & Shelter$14,652Animals$13,700Health$7,550Human Services$4,000Food & Nutrition$1,015
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.
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.
Duneland Health CouncilIN13.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: Duneland Health Council · Unity Foundation of la Porte County · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 organisation BR 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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. 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
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: CITIZENS CONCERNED FOR THE HOMELESS.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
medium risk
~3 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 5 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
5 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up +79% since.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 351842668 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on CITIZENS CONCERNED FOR THE HOMELESS, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- WatchFinancial stability— Roughly 3 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
- On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 3% of their budget — diversified.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to Br Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Br Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
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