Skip to content
Brush Foundation Ta at a glance

· Private foundation

Brush Foundation Ta

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$367k
Granted FY2025still arriving
17
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$65k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Health$891kCivil Rights$845kPublic Benefit$233kEducation$85kCommunity Improvement$53kHuman Services$43kEnvironment$25kPhilanthropy$8kOther$0
02FY2025 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k15 grants · $295k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $65k
$18,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$8.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PRETERM CLEVELAND INC$65,000
OHIO WOMENS ALLIANCE$32,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER OHIO$30,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD SOUTHWEST OHIO REGION$30,000
ABORTION FORWARD ALLIANCE$30,000
CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY$25,000
ABORTION FUND OF OHIO$25,000
JUST CHOICE$23,000
OHIO VOICE$18,000
OHIO PROGRESSIVE ASIAN WOMENS LEADERSHIP$16,500
CLEVELAND CLINIC$15,000
COLLECTIVE POWER FOR REPRODUCTIVE$10,000
FAITH CHOICE OHIO$10,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD RESEARCH CENTER-BLOOM$10,000
UNITE FOR REPRODUCTIVE & GENDER EQUITY$10,000
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 (FY19–25, $178k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%URGE: $40k → 14%URGE: $25k → 14%URGE: $20k → 14%FAITH CHOICE OHIO: $20k → 15%OHIO RELIGIOUS COALITION FOR REPRODUCTIV: $15k → 15%FAITH CHOICE OHIO: $15k → 15%FAITH CHOICE OHIO: $10k → 15%OHIO RELIGIOUS COALITION FOR: $10k → 15%JUST CHOICE: $23k → 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.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.0M · 17 repeat orgs$243k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +83% since the first grant, against +23% for those funded once.

17 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
11

Total granted

$2.0M
$121k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+83%
+23%

Still filing today

71%
82%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 67% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $122k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Civil RightsHealthHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitEnvironmentOther
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

  • AF
    Abortion Fund of Ohio
    7× · 2019–2025 · $265k · revenue +106%
  • NV
    NEW VOICES PITTSBURGH INC
    6× · 2019–2025 · $235k · revenue +106%
  • OV
    OHIO VOICE
    7× · 2019–2025 · $233k · revenue +201%

Funded once

  • PO
    PRO-CHOICE OHIO FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2024 · $25k
  • TO
    THE OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCILgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $25k · revenue +45%
  • RO
    Restoring Our Own Through Transformation
    one grant, 2022 · $20k · revenue +23%
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
Abortion Forward

Abortion forward is committed to developing and sustaining a constituency that uses the political process to guarantee every ohioan the right to make personal decisions regarding a full range of reproductive choices, including legal…

—
2
Ohioans for Reproductive Freedom

Ohioans for Reproductive Freedom, Inc. is a coalition of statewide reproductive heal, rights, and justice organizations working to secure abortion access and protect reproductive freedom in Ohio.

—
3
Ohioans United for Reproductive Rights

Ballot issue political action committee in the State of Ohio to advocate for the passage of a constitutional amendment to protect reproductive rights.

—
4
American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio Inc

Advocate for and effect systemic change to ensure justice and equity for all ohioans.

—
5
The Women's Clinic of Columbus

Women's health clinic focusing on helping at-risk parents deal with issues related to prenancy and parenting.

Health
6
Protect Women Ohio Action Inc

Protect Women Ohio Action is a Section 501(c)(4) social welfare organization and registered ballot committee in the State of Ohio engaged in advocacy activities related to the "Right to Reproductive Freedom with Protections for Health and…

—
7
Conservative Agenda for America

Conservative Agenda for America stands for the sanctity of life and the protection of women by educating citizens about the dangers of abortion.

—
8
Ohioans for Reproductive Freedom Pac

Ballot issue political action committee advocating for the passage of a constitutional amendment in the State of Ohio to protect reproductive freedom.

—
9
Pro-Choice Washington

To protect and promote every persons right to access the full range of reproductive healthcare choices in Washington State, including safe and legal abortion, through education, advocacy, lobbying and coalition-building

—
10
Cleveland Pregnancy Center

Providing Biblical, life-affirming resources and services to those affected by unplanned pregnancy.

Health
11
Cobalt Advocates

Cobalt advocates actualizes policies, structures and attitudes that secure unassailable reproductive autonomy and abortion access utilizing the political process and civic engagement.

—
12
Planned Parenthood Affiliates of Ohio

To educate, encourage and protect informed individual choice regarding reproductive health care and advocate public policies which guarantee the right to such care.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio; the most unlike its peers is Urge. 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

24 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. 24 of the 33 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
24/24
Grantees still filing
17/24
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Abortion Fund of Ohio: $265,000 · HealthAbortion Fund of OhioPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER OHIO: $113,000 · HealthPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATE…PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF SOUTHWEST OHIO REGION: $113,000 · HealthPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF SOUTHW…PRETERM CLEVELAND INC: $65,000 · HealthPRETERM CLEVELAND INCRestoring Our Own Through Transformation: $20,000 · Health+1 more: $10,000 · HealthNEW VOICES PITTSBURGH INC: $235,000 · Civil RightsNEW VOICES PITTSBURGH INCURGE UNITE FOR REPRODUCTIVE & GENDER EQUITY: $175,000 · Civil RightsURGE UNITE FOR REPRODUCTIVE…ABORTION FORWARD ALLIANCE: $130,000 · Civil RightsABORTION FORWARD ALLIANCE+4 more: $20,805 · Civil RightsPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF: $145,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD OFPRETERM: $130,250 · OtherPRETERMCLEVELAND CLINIC: $40,000 · OtherCLEVELAND CLINICPRO-CHOICE OHIO FOUNDATION: $25,000 · OtherPRO-CHOICE OHIO FOUND…COLLECTIVE POWER FOR REPRODUCTIVE: $23,500 · OtherROOTT: $20,100 · OtherOHIO PROGRESSIVE ASIAN WOMENS LEADERSHIP: $16,500 · OtherTHE OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $25,000 · OtherTHE OHIO ENVIRONMENTA…+3 more: $15,538 · OtherOHIO VOICE: $232,540 · Public BenefitOHIO VOICE+1 more: $6,750 · Public BenefitOhio Womens Alliance: $149,000 · Community ImprovementOhio Wome…THIRD SECTOR NEW ENGLAND INC: $37,500 · Community ImprovementTHIRD SEC…THE CENTER FOR COMMUNITY SOLUTIONS: $15,000 · Community ImprovementTHE CENTE…URGE: $85,000 · Human ServicesFaith Choice Ohio: $70,000 · Human ServicesCHOICE NETWORK INC: $23,000 · Human ServicesCASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY: $85,375 · Education
Health$586,000Civil Rights$560,805Other$440,888Public Benefit$239,290Community Improvement$201,500Human Services$178,000Education$85,375

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetAbortion Fund of Ohio: $265,000 over 7y, 11% of budgetNEW VOICES PITTSBURGH INC: $235,000 over 6y, 5.8% of budgetOHIO VOICE: $232,540 over 7y, 1.5% of budgetURGE UNITE FOR REPRODUCTIVE & GENDER EQUITY: $175,000 over 4y, 1.6% of budgetOhio Womens Alliance: $149,000 over 5y, 3.7% of budgetABORTION FORWARD ALLIANCE: $130,000 over 5y, 3.4% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER OHIO: $113,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF SOUTHWEST OHIO REGION: $113,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetCASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY: $85,375 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetURGE: $85,000 over 3y, 34% of budgetFaith Choice Ohio: $70,000 over 5y, 6.7% of budgetPRETERM CLEVELAND INC: $65,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetTHIRD SECTOR NEW ENGLAND INC: $37,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $25,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetRestoring Our Own Through Transformation: $20,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetTHE CENTER FOR COMMUNITY SOLUTIONS: $15,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF OHIO FOUNDATION INC: $12,500 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetNATIONAL HARM REDUCTION COALITION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNEO Philanthropy Inc: $6,750 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPHILANTHROPY OHIO: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPREGNANCY JUSTICE INC: $705 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

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.

The Susan Thompson Bu…The George Gund Found…The Char and Chuck Fo…New Venture FundPerkins Maurice No 1 …Planned Parenthood Fe…Groundswell FundColumbus FoundationNEO Philanthropy IncWellspring Philanthro…Rockefeller Philanthr…Ohio Voice
The Susan Thompson Buffett FoundationNE32.4× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation · The George Gund Foundation · The Char and Chuck Fowler Family Foundation · New Venture Fund · Perkins Maurice No 1 Ta · Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc · Groundswell Fund · Columbus Foundation · NEO Philanthropy Inc · Wellspring Philanthropic Fund Inc · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Ohio Voice

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 Brush Foundation Ta funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Brush Foundation Ta. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 3%
  • Third Sector New England Inc: 3% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Brush Foundation Ta?

Find your warmest path to Brush Foundation Ta 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 33 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 Brush Foundation Ta’s 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