Skip to content

· Private foundation

Brinkerhoff-Sample Family Foundation

Its FY2023 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$35k
Granted FY2023
4
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$30k
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, FY2017 to 2023.

Philanthropy$124kReligion$39kHuman Services$14kHealth$11kRecreation & Sports$4kFood & Nutrition$2kEnvironment$500Youth Development$400
02FY2023 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k3 grants · $5k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $30k
$4,020
Median grant
1
States reached
$103k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNITED WAY OF WASHTENAW COUNTY$30,000
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH$4,020
PEACE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER$1,000
BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF$400
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 (FY17–23, $14k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%PEACE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER: $10k → 14%PEACE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER: $2k → 14%PEACE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER: $1k → 14%PEACE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER: $1k → 14%PEACE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER: $500 → 14%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.
$185k · 9 repeat orgs$10k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +202% since the first grant, against +38% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2023, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
5

Total granted

$185k
$9k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+202%
+38%

Still filing today

44%
60%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $400 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
EnvironmentHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • UW
    UNITED WAY
    4× · 2017–2020 · $80k
  • UW
    UNITED WAY OF WASHTENAW COUNTY
    2× · 2021–2023 · $44k · revenue -89%
  • FP
    FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
    2× · 2020–2023 · $18k

Funded once

  • FP
    FIRST PRESBYTERIAN
    one grant, 2021 · $7k
  • HW
    HURON WATERLOO PATHWAYS INITIATIVEgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $2k · revenue +26%
  • LL
    LEGACY LAND CONSERVANCYgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $500 · revenue +294%
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
Land Conservancy of West Michigan

Our mission is conserving West Michigans ecologically critical land. We protect land by creating public nature preserves, providing support to communities and local governments in creating natural areas, and helping private landowners…

Environment
2
Michigan Legacy Art Park

Inspire awareness, appreciation and passion for michigan's history and stories, culture and environment through the arts.

Arts & Culture
3
Business Leaders for Michigan

Business leaders for michigan is a nonprofit, nonpartisan statewide organization driven by ceos from the state's leading employers, all working toward a shared goal: making michigan a top 10 state for jobs, talent and a thriving economy.…

—
4
Six Rivers Land Conservancy Fka Six Rivers Regional Land Conservancy

To conserve, sustain, and connect natural areas, land, and waters that make the places we live special

Environment
5
Upper Peninsula Land Conservancy

Up land conservancy protects land in michigan's upper peninsula by owning it as nature preserves and working forest reserves, and through conservation easements(perpetual, voluntary agreements that guard the conservation values of the…

Environment
6
Huron Pines Resource Conservation & Development Council Inc

It is our mission at huron pines to conserve and enhance northern michigan's natural resources to ensure healthy water, protected places and vibrant communities. for alomst 50 years, our work across the forests, lakes and streams of…

Environment
7
Michigan Trails & Greenways Alliance

Michigan trails & greenways alliance is the statewide voice for nonmotorized trail users, helping people build, connect and promote trails for a healthier and more prosperous michigan.

Arts & Culture
8
Grand Traverse Regional Land Conservancy

The mission of gtrlc is to protect significant natural, scenic and farm lands and advance land stewardship now and for future generations.

Environment
9
Heart of the Lakes Ctr for Land Cons

Heart of the Lakes provides technical assistance, leadership training, and strategic communication tools that help organizations thrive - from grassroots land conservancies to larger regional conservation groups. Programs such as peer…

Environment
10
Michigan Enviromental Council

Informing and educating the public and decision makers about environmental issues.

Environment
11
Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition

Works to end environmental injustice by empowering communities at the grassroots level.the corporation is organzied exclusively for charitable, religious, educational and scientific purposes, including for such purposes, the makeing of…

Environment
12
Greater Lansing Food Bank

Partner to alleviate hunger one meal at a time, to create a future where everyone has access to nourishing food.

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Huron Waterloo Pathways Initiative; the most unlike its peers is University of Michigan. 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 15 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNITED WAY: $80,069 · OtherUNITED WAYUNITED WAY OF WASHTENAW COUNTY: $44,000 · OtherUNITED WAY OF WASHTENAW COUNTYFIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH: $18,020 · OtherFIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCHFIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF ANN AR: $14,000 · OtherFIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF ANN ARUniversity of Michigan: $11,000 · OtherUniversity of MichiganFIRST PRESBYTERIAN: $6,500 · Other+4 more: $2,118 · OtherPeace Neighborhood Center: $14,000 · Human ServicesTHE TREELINE CONSERVANCY: $2,000 · EnvironmentHURON WATERLOO PATHWAYS INITIATIVE: $1,500 · EnvironmentLEGACY LAND CONSERVANCY: $500 · EnvironmentGROWING HOPE INC: $500 · Youth Development
Other$175,707Human Services$14,000Environment$4,000Youth Development$500

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 budgetUNITED WAY OF WASHTENAW COUNTY: $44,000 over 2y, 5.3% of budgetPeace Neighborhood Center: $14,000 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetUniversity of Michigan: $11,000 over 3y, 3.8% of budgetTHE TREELINE CONSERVANCY: $2,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetHURON WATERLOO PATHWAYS INITIATIVE: $1,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLEGACY LAND CONSERVANCY: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGROWING HOPE INC: $500 over 1y, 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 UNITED WAY OF WASHTENAW COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds Peace Neighborhood Center ↗
  • Who funds University of Michigan ↗
  • Who funds THE TREELINE CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds HURON WATERLOO PATHWAYS INITIATIVE ↗
  • Who funds LEGACY LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds GROWING HOPE INC ↗
  • Who funds MENTOR LIVINGSTON ↗

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.

Ann Arbor Area Community FoundationMI17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation · James a and Faith Knight Foundation · Harry a and Margaret D Towsley Foundation · DTE Energy Foundation · THE MOSAIC FOUNDATION (Of R & P Heydon) · United Way of Washtenaw County · Charles Stewart Mott Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Brinkerhoff-Sample Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Brinkerhoff-Sample Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%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
    4report 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.

    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 15 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Brinkerhoff-Sample Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph