· Private foundation
Brystrong 4 Life Fund
Its FY2020 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What it funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2020.
Where the money goes
Grants by size, and the largest recipients.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| One Love Foundation | $7,000 |
| Stevenson University | $5,000 |
| Herren Project | $1,000 |
| Donate Life | $957 |
| Family Crisis Center of Baltimore | $704 |
| Back on my Feet | $500 |
| The Joshua York Legacy Foundation | $100 |
Does the money reach high-need areas?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.
Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–20) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 80% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
How this is measured
How this is measured
Who it funds again
Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.
5 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2020, 3 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (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 FY2020, 37% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
How this is measured
Backed again, and grew
- SUSTEVENSON UNIVERSITY3× · 2018–2020 · $9k · revenue +23%
- GOGirls on the Run Greater Chesapeake3× · 2017–2019 · $6k
- IGIndividual grant recipient3× · 2017–2019 · $5k
Funded once
- SUSalisbury Universityone grant, 2017 · $2k
- AAAnne Arundel County Schoolsone grant, 2019 · $1k
- ATAshley Treatment Centerone grant, 2017 · $500
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.
5 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. 5 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.
Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee
Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing
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.
Open a dossier: American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation
How this is measured
How much its grantees rely on government
Each dot is one organization Brystrong 4 Life Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Brystrong 4 Life Fund. Bigger dots raise more.
- Autism Society of Maryland Inc: 67% of income from government
- Stevenson University: 6% of income from government
How this is measured
Play a game based on Brystrong 4 Life’s filings →