Skip to content

· Private foundation

Broad Street Children's Foundation

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.

$96k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$20k
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, FY2018 to 2025.

Human Services$364kCrime & Legal$135kYouth Development$65kPhilanthropy$5k
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $19k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $77k
$10,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$3.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
EAGLE RANCH$20,000
ALABAMA SHERIFF BOYS RANCH$15,000
THE JOY HOUSE$12,000
BIG OAK RANCH$10,000
CHESTNUT MOUNTAIN RANCH$10,000
RODEHEAVER BOYS RANCH$10,000
EDGEWOOD CHILDRENS RANCH$7,500
SEAMARK RANCH$6,500
HOMES FOR HOPE$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 (FY18–25, $218k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%SEAMARK RANCH: $30k → 14%BIG OAK RANCH: $15k → 13%CHESTNUT MOUNTAIN RANCH: $23k → 19%SEAMARK RANCH: $21k → 14%BIG OAK RANCH: $10k → 13%CHESTNUT MOUNTAIN RANCH: $20k → 19%SEAMARK RANCH: $20k → 14%BIG OAK RANCH: $10k → 13%CHESTNUT MOUNTAIN RANCH: $20k → 19%SEAMARK RANCH: $10k → 14%BIG OAK RANCH: $5k → 13%CHESTNUT MOUNTAIN RANCH: $10k → 19%SEAMARK RANCH: $7k → 14%BIG OAK RANCH: $5k → 13%CHESTNUT MOUNTAIN RANCH: $10k → 19%BIG OAK RANCH: $3k → 13%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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$553k · 8 repeat orgs$15k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
1

Total granted

$553k
$10k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+9%
+162%

Still filing today

88%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’20’21’23’24’25
Human ServicesHealthPhilanthropyCrime & LegalOther
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

  • EAGLE RANCH INC
    6× · 2018–2025 · $123k · revenue +9%
  • SR
    SEAMARK RANCH INC
    5× · 2018–2025 · $87k · revenue +37%
  • CM
    CHESTNUT MOUNTAIN RANCH INC
    5× · 2020–2025 · $83k · revenue +287%

Funded once

  • RF
    RODEHEAVER FOUNDATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +162%
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
Eagle Rock Boys Home

Residential care for children

Housing & Shelter
2
Soaring Wings Ranch Inc

Soaring wings provides a christ-centered home for children while working with their families to overcome challenges they are facing for as long as needed.

Youth Development
3
Joy Ranch Inc

To provide housing and services to children who are unable to live with their parents or guardians.

Human Services
4
Salem Children's Home Inc

The organization offers a structured teaching program, in a farm setting, for boys who are struggling with issues at home, and who need a new environment that will immerse them in the word of god to help rebuild their lives.

Human Services
5
Heritage Ranch

Heritage ranch is a christian children's home that serves boys in the midst of personal or family crisis from which they require respite. our staff provides a safe and nurturing environment where these valuable young people are empowered…

Youth Development
6
Whetstone Boys Ranch

Provides counseling/therapy and boarding school for the rehabilitation of at-risk boys ages 13-17

Human Services
7
Flying H Youth Ranch

To bring troubled teenage boys who are struggling within their families and their families to Gods perspective and standards of family living.

Education
8
Redemption Ridge

Redemption Ridge is dedicated to bringing hope and healing to young girls rescued from the horrendous world of sex trafficking. We are committed to redeeming lives, restoring dignity and placing purpose in hearts of these precious children.

—
9
Raven Rock Ranch

Recovering children and rescuing horses to begin a bond of healing.

Animals
10
Fathers Heart - a Ranch for Children Inc

The organization operates residential group homes for children ages six to twelve with behavioral disorders and family-related problems. the goal of the program is to have the children reach a level of behavior which will allow them to…

Human Services
11
Bluebonnet Youth Ranch

Home for abused or neglected children.to provide mothers with children a safe loving home and hope for a brighter future.

Human Services
12
New River Ranch Inc

Provide residential child care and behavioral health services for at risk children ages 10-18

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chestnut Mountain Ranch Inc; the most unlike its peers is Joy House Inc. 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

9 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. 9 of the 10 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)
9/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SEAMARK RANCH INC: $87,000 · Human ServicesSEAMARK RANCH INCCHESTNUT MOUNTAIN RANCH INC: $83,000 · Human ServicesCHESTNUT MOUNTAIN RANCH INCBIG OAK RANCH INC: $48,000 · Human ServicesBIG OAK RANCH INCEAGLE RANCH INC: $123,000 · HealthEAGLE RANCH INCEDGEWOOD CHILDREN'S RANCH INC: $12,500 · HealthEDGEWOOD CHILDREN'S RANCH I…RODEHEAVER BOYS RANCH INC: $85,000 · Crime & LegalRODEHEAVER BOYS RANCH INCJoy House Inc: $49,500 · Crime & LegalJoy House IncALABAMA SHERIFF BOYS RANCH: $65,000 · OtherALABAMA SHER…RODEHEAVER FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 · PhilanthropyHOMES FOR HOPE: $5,000 · Philanthropy
Human Services$218,000Health$135,500Crime & Legal$134,500Other$65,000Philanthropy$15,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetEAGLE RANCH INC: $123,000 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetSEAMARK RANCH INC: $87,000 over 5y, 1.0% of budgetRODEHEAVER BOYS RANCH INC: $85,000 over 4y, 1.2% of budgetCHESTNUT MOUNTAIN RANCH INC: $83,000 over 5y, 1.2% of budgetJoy House Inc: $49,500 over 4y, 1.9% of budgetBIG OAK RANCH INC: $48,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetEDGEWOOD CHILDREN'S RANCH INC: $12,500 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetRODEHEAVER FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 4.3% 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 EAGLE RANCH INC ↗
  • Who funds SEAMARK RANCH INC ↗
  • Who funds RODEHEAVER BOYS RANCH INC ↗
  • Who funds CHESTNUT MOUNTAIN RANCH INC ↗
  • Who funds Joy House Inc ↗
  • Who funds BIG OAK RANCH INC ↗
  • Who funds EDGEWOOD CHILDREN'S RANCH INC ↗
  • Who funds RODEHEAVER FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds HOMES FOR HOPE ↗

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.

Natl Christian Charitable Fdn IncGA12.5× affinity7 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Broad Street Children's Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Broad Street Children's Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 40%0%1%3%5%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
    4get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Broad Street Children's Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Broad Street Children's 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 10 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 Broad Street Children's’ filings →

    More from the funding graph