Skip to content
Bright Futures Fund at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Bright Futures Fund

To offer positive education opportunities to youth in a safe, value-centered environment, and for such other purposes as permitted by law.

$8.0M
Granted FY2025still arriving
30
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$561k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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.

Education$22M
02FY2025 · 30 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 30 grants below total $6,419,625, the rows itemized in this filing. The $8,026,675 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $1,607,050 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $6k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $64k
  • $50k–250k15 grants · $2.4M
  • $250k+11 grants · $3.9M
$216,750
Median grant
2
States reached
$7.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NATIVITY OF MARY$561,000
HOLY CROSS$433,500
CATHEDRAL SCHOOL$427,125
ST CHARLES BORROMEO$420,750
ST REGIS ACADEMY$337,875
ST JAMES$325,125
ST THOMAS MORE$325,125
ST JOHN LALANDE$293,250
ST FRANCIS XAVIER$267,750
OUR LADY OF PRESENTATION$261,375
ST PATRICK$261,375
CRISTO REY KANSAS CITY HIGH SCHOOL$248,625
ST JAMES$229,500
ST MICHAEL THE ARCHANGEL HIGH SCHOOL$216,750
ST GABRIEL ARCHANGEL$216,750
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 83% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%ST THERESE NORTH: $166k → 8%OUR LADY OF HOPE: $716k → 15%OUR LADY ANGELSHOPE SCHOOL: $588k → 15%OUR LADY ANGELSHOPE SCHOOL: $530k → 15%ST JAMES: $230k → 8%OUR LADY ANGELSHOPE SCHOOL: $507k → 15%ST FRANCIS XAVIER: $268k → 18%ST JAMES: $223k → 8%OUR LADY ANGELSHOPE SCHOOL: $481k → 15%ST FRANCIS XAVIER: $153k → 18%ST JAMES: $153k → 8%OUR LADY ANGELSHOPE SCHOOL: $474k → 15%ST CHARLES BORROMEO: $421k → 8%CRISTO REY KANSAS CITY HIGH SCHOOL: $249k → 15%CATHEDRAL SCHOOL: $427k → 18%ST CHARLES BORROMEO: $223k → 8%CATHEDRAL SCHOOL: $261k → 18%ST CHARLES BORROMEO: $169k → 8%ST PATRICK: $261k → 8%ST JAMES: $325k → 18%ST PATRICK: $179k → 8%ST JAMES: $210k → 18%ST THOMAS MORE: $325k → 15%ST THOMAS MORE: $204k → 15%ST GABRIEL ARCHANGEL: $217k → 8%ST REGIS ACADEMY: $338k → 15%ST REGIS ACADEMY: $236k → 15%ST REGIS ACADEMY: $159k → 15%NOTRE DAME DE SION SCHOOL: $210k → 15%ST ELIZABETH: $172k → 15%ST JOHN LALANDE: $293k → 15%ST JOHN LALANDE: $191k → 15%NATIVITY OF MARY: $561k → 15%NATIVITY OF MARY: $383k → 15%NATIVITY OF MARY: $185k → 15%ST MICHAEL THE ARCHANGEL HIGH SCHOOL: $217k → 15%ST TERESA ACADEMY: $198k → 15%ST TERESA ACADEMY: $159k → 15%HOLY CROSS: $806k → 15%HOLY CROSS SCHOOL: $648k → 15%HOLY CROSS SCHOOL: $623k → 15%HOLY CROSS SCHOOL: $598k → 15%HOLY CROSS SCHOOL: $574k → 15%OUR LADY OF PRESENTATION: $261k → 15%HOLY CROSS SCHOOL: $530k → 15%OUR LADY OF PRESENTATION: $172k → 15%HOLY CROSS: $434k → 15%HOLY CROSS: $319k → 15%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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$21M · 31 repeat orgs$1.2M to everyone else

31 repeat relationships: 27 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

31
6

Total granted

$21M
$1.1M

Still filing today

3%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $45k went to new ones.

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

  • HC
    HOLY CROSS
    9× · 2017–2025 · $5.1M
  • OL
    OUR LADY OF HOPE
    8× · 2018–2025 · $3.5M
  • NO
    NATIVITY OF MARY
    3× · 2023–2025 · $1.1M

Funded once

  • OL
    OUR LADY ANGELSHOPE SCHOOL
    one grant, 2017 · $1.0M
  • CD
    CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF KANSAS CITY-ST JOSEPH
    one grant, 2023 · $70k
  • SE
    ST ELIZABETH ANN SEATON ST VINCENT DE PAUL CONFERENCE
    one grant, 2024 · $26k
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

1 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. 1 of the 40 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
1/1
Grantees still filing
1/1
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HOLY CROSS: $5,100,859 · OtherHOLY CROSSOUR LADY OF HOPE: $3,505,936 · OtherOUR LADY OF HOPENATIVITY OF MARY: $1,128,375 · OtherOUR LADY ANGELSHOPE SCHOOL: $1,022,261 · OtherST CHARLES BORROMEO: $812,814 · OtherCATHEDRAL SCHOOL: $790,501 · Other+34 more: $9,775,304 · Other+34 more
Other$22,136,050

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

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCRISTO REY KANSAS CITY SISTERS OF CHARI TY OF LEAVENWORTH HIGH SCHOOL: $398,438 over 3y, 6.9% 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 CRISTO REY KANSAS CITY SISTERS OF CHARI TY OF LEAVENWORTH HIGH SCHOOL ↗

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.

Foundation for Inclus…Greater Kansas City C…Ross Family FoundationGreater HorizonsOracle Health Foundat…Servant FoundationJoseph M Fahey and Ma…Patricia Sweeny Memor…Constance M Cooper Ch…John J Sullivan Jr Fo…Catholic Community Fo…McCullough Family Fou…
Foundation for Inclusive Religious Education IncMO39× affinity16 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Foundation for Inclusive Religious Education Inc · Greater Kansas City Community Foundation · Ross Family Foundation · Greater Horizons · Oracle Health Foundation · Servant Foundation · Joseph M Fahey and Mary Elizabeth Rogers Fahey Foundation Inc · Patricia Sweeny Memorial Fund · Constance M Cooper Charitable Foundation · John J Sullivan Jr Foundation John Houlehan & Mark Henke-Trustees · Catholic Community Foundation · McCullough Family 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 Bright Futures Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Bright Futures Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 40 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 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 Bright Futures’ 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