Skip to content

· Private foundation

Bradan Lane Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$69k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$10k
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, FY2022 to 2025.

Youth Development$69kEducation$30kInternational$19kArts & Culture$14kEnvironment$10kScience & Tech$10kHuman Services$5k
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $19k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $50k
$10,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$6k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MAVEN YOUTH$10,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
NATIVE AMERICANS IN HIGHEREDUCATION$10,000
OMG YOUTH AVIATION EXPLORERS$10,000
GIRLS WHO HACK INC$10,000
MIRROR HOPE FOUNDATION$9,000
I AM A SCIENTIST$5,000
R3 STUDENT OUTREACH$5,000
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 (FY24–24, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%LIVEGIRL INC: $5k → 9%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

WA
MA
NJ
CT
CA
VA
AZ
TN
SC
GA
TX
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 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
Girls in Stem
Human Services
2
The School for Global Thinkers

Our mission is to challenge and nurture young women to thrive in future global markets through personalized STEM advanced academics. Through a supportive small school and single-gender environment, project-based learning, and STEM advanced…

Education
3
P31Girls Incorporated

youth educational and enrichment programs for girls

Youth Development
4
LitShop

LitShop provides after-school and summer programming that pairs engaging literacy opportunities with building and making. By intentionally creating a supportive space where girls and gender-expansive youth can take risks, explore…

Education
5
Be Academy of Steam

B.E. Academy for Girls empowers young women through a rigorous, culturally responsive STEAM curriculum that centers identity, cultivates leadership and critical thinking, and integrates real-world experiences to prepare them for college,…

Education
6
Digital Girl Incorporated

Digital Girl, Inc. (DGI) is a non-profit organization dedicated to empowering the underserved youth of New York City, especially young girls, to pursue studies and careers in STEM ( Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) disciplines.

Education
7
Stem for Development
Education
8
Digi-Bridge

Digi-Bridge sparks interest and passion in science, technology, engineering, arts, and math (STEAM) learning, ensuring that students have the opportunities and skills to succeed in a rapidly-changing world by fostering curiosity,…

Education
9
Self-Estem

Self-eSTEM ignites pride, purpose and possibility among girls and women, by providing STEM training that strengthens digital, technical and leadership skills, sustaining their STEM identities.

Unclassified
10
Connecting Stem Kids With the Future Inc
—
11
We Create Tech Inc

To provide technology education and career preparation for underrepresented youth, equipping them with skills in coding, digital media, and other STEAM fields to increase diversity in the tech industry.

Youth Development
12
Stem to Success

Providing STEM education to underprivileged communities through workshops, camps, and classes.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is InspireHER Stem; the most unlike its peers is Duc Learning Center. 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

8 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. 8 of the 18 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)
8/8
Grantees still filing
4/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GIRLS WHO HACK INC: $20,000 · OtherGIRLS WHO HACK INCDYNAMIC YOUNG MINORITIES OF: $10,000 · OtherDYNAMIC YOUNG MINORITIES OFOMG YOUTH AVIATION EXPLORERS: $10,000 · OtherOMG YOUTH AVIATION EXPLORERSNATIVE AMERICANS IN HIGHEREDUCATION: $10,000 · OtherNATIVE AMERICANS IN HIGHEREDUCATIONTHOMPSON ISLAND OUTWARD BOUND: $10,000 · OtherTHOMPSON ISLAND OUTWARD BOUNDIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTRUE LIFE INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL OR: $10,000 · OtherTRUE LIFE INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL ORBGH FOUNDATION BLACK GIRLS HACK: $9,000 · OtherBGH FOUNDATION BLACK GIRLS HACKI AM A SCIENTIST: $5,000 · OtherNORTHERN ARIZONA CHILDRENS ADVOCATE: $4,000 · OtherSawhorse Revolution: $10,000 · EducationSawhorse RevolutionDUC LEARNING CENTER: $10,000 · EducationDUC LEARNING CENTERInspireHER STEM: $9,000 · EducationInspireHER STEMR3 Student Outreach: $5,000 · EducationR3 Student OutreachBISBEE SCIENCE EXPLORATION & RESEARCH CENTER INC: $5,000 · EducationBISBEE SCIENCE EXPLORATION &…Maven Youth: $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentLiveGirl Inc: $5,000 · Human ServicesTHOMASVILLE CULTURAL CENTER INC: $5,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$98,000Education$39,000Youth Development$10,000Human Services$5,000Arts & Culture$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSawhorse Revolution: $10,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetDUC LEARNING CENTER: $10,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetLiveGirl Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetBISBEE SCIENCE EXPLORATION & RESEARCH CENTER INC: $5,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetTHOMASVILLE CULTURAL CENTER INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% 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 Sawhorse Revolution ↗
  • Who funds Maven Youth ↗
  • Who funds DUC LEARNING CENTER ↗
  • Who funds InspireHER STEM ↗
  • Who funds LiveGirl Inc ↗
  • Who funds R3 Student Outreach ↗
  • Who funds BISBEE SCIENCE EXPLORATION & RESEARCH CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds THOMASVILLE CULTURAL CENTER 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.

National Philanthropic TrustPA7.9× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · 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 Bradan Lane Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Bradan Lane Foundation. 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%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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
    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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Bradan Lane Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Bradan Lane 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 18 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 Bradan Lane’s filings →

    More from the funding graph