· Private foundation
Brinker Family Foundation Inc Xxxxxx3001
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.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 45% of BRINKER FAMILY FOUNDATION INC XXXXXX3001’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k24 grants · $43k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $12k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Vision to Learn | $12,148 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,750 |
| CORPORATE ACCOUNTABILITY INTERNATIONAL | $2,250 |
| National League of Women Voters | $2,250 |
| AMERICAN FRIENDS SERVICE COMMITTEE | $2,250 |
| League of Women's Voters of La Crosse | $2,250 |
| HEIFER INTERNATIONAL | $2,250 |
| WOMEN'S INTERNATIONAL LEAGUE FOR PEACE | $2,250 |
| UNITED PALESTINIAN APPEAL | $2,250 |
| Fellowship of Reconciliation | $2,250 |
| New Horizons Shelt and Outreach Center | $2,250 |
| PEACE TAX FOUNDATION | $2,250 |
| WOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL | $2,250 |
| The Whale Sanctuary Project | $2,055 |
| Glioblastoma Research Foundation | $2,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY19–25, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
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 — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +47% since the first grant, against +16% for the ones you funded once.
45 repeat relationships — 19 still active in FY2025, 26 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $9k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- PVPEACETREES VIETNAM8× · 2018–2025 · $21k · revenue +170%
- UPUNITED PALESTINIAN APPEAL INC9× · 2017–2025 · $16k · revenue +400%
VISION TO LEARN3× · 2022–2025 · $14k · revenue +77%
Funded once
- YYWCAone grant, 2021 · $5k
- LCLa Crosse Area Family Young Men's Christian Association Incone grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue +16%
- SCSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATIONone grant, 2018 · $4k · revenue -70%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…
Water.org's goal is to bring safe water and sanitation to the world through access to small, affordable loans.
To investigate, research, write, publish, present conferences and teach with respect to global, regional, transboundary, and comparative environmental issues and to make the findings from such activities available to the general public; to…
Wildaid's mission is to inspire change and empower the world to protect wildlife and vital habitats from critical threats.
Educational & charitable. to provide legal and scientific information to public interest attorneys and scientists in numerous countries.
The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.
To lead and coordinate the global initiative to address and prevent criminalization, violence, and impunity against indigenous peoples towards strengthening their collectives, solidarity, and actions.
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Evidence Action and the most unlike its peers is La Crosse Area Family Young Men's Christian 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.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 36 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
67 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 67 of the 107 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
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.
- Who funds PEACETREES VIETNAM ↗
- Who funds UNITED PALESTINIAN APPEAL INC ↗
- Who funds EVIDENCE ACTION ↗
- Who funds VISION TO LEARN ↗
- Who funds Infact DBA Corporate Accountability ↗
- Who funds PEACE TAX FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds WOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds FELLOWSHIP OF RECONCILIATION INC ↗
- Who funds HOUSING MATTERS ↗
- Who funds WOMEN'S INTERNATIONAL LEAGUE FOR PEACE & FREEDOM UNO INC ↗
- Who funds MIDDLE EAST CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE OF THE RANGE & THE AMERICAN MUSTANG ↗
- Who funds La Crosse Area Family Young Men's Christian Association Inc ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE EARTH ↗
- Who funds ALIGHT ↗
- Who funds WOOF GANG RESCUE INC ↗
- Who funds SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds REFUGEE & IMMIGRANT CENTER FOR EDUCATION & LEGAL SERVICES ↗
- Who funds 350ORG ↗
- Who funds Save The Children Federation Inc ↗
- Who funds SUNRISE MOVEMENT EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds PACIFIC CREST TRAIL ASSOCIATION ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Ge Aerospace Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Marin Community Foundation · Xcel Energy Foundation · AbbVie Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Network for Good · Shell USA Company Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Aetna Foundation Inc · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · American Endowment 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 organization Brinker Family Foundation Inc Xxxxxx3001 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.
- Lutheran Immigration & Refugee Service Inc Dba Global Refuge — 100% of income from government
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Emmaus Inc — 10% of income from government
- American Welding Society Inc — 0% of income from government
- Infact Dba Corporate Accountability — 0% of income from government
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 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Brinker Family Foundation Inc Xxxxxx3001?
Find your warmest path to Brinker Family Foundation Inc Xxxxxx3001 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.