Skip to content
Burt Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Burt 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.

$2.4M
Granted FY2025still arriving
29
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$300k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Animals$9.2MHuman Services$2.4MEnvironment$1.4MHealth$1.3MPublic Safety & Disaster$100kArts & Culture$65kOther$0
02FY2025 · 29 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $4k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $125k
  • $50k–250k22 grants · $2.0M
  • $250k+1 grant · $300k
$75,000
Median grant
8
States reached
$15M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MICHIGAN ANIMAL RESCUE LE$300,000
BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SANCTUARY$175,000
UMRC FOUNDATION$150,000
PAWS WITH A CAUSE$150,000
DOG IS MY COPILOT INC$150,000
MICHIGAN ANTI-CRUELTY SOC$150,000
FRIENDS OF PIMA CO ANIMAL CARE$125,000
HUMANE SOCIETY OF HURON V$125,000
PERFORMING ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY$100,000
FISHER HOUSE$75,000
PILOTS TO THE RESCUE$75,000
TUCSON WILDLIFE CENTER INC$75,000
PROJECT ST VET$75,000
HORSES HAVEN$75,000
TIP OF THE MITT WATERSHED$75,000
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 (FY17–25, $1.6M) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 29% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%PAWS WITH A CAUSE: $150k → 8%PAWS WITH A CAUSE: $150k → 8%PAWS WITH A CAUSE: $125k → 8%PAWS WITH A CAUSE: $125k → 8%PAWS WITH A CAUSE: $125k → 8%PAWS WITH A CAUSE: $125k → 8%PAWS WITH A CAUSE: $125k → 8%PAWS WITH A CAUSE: $100k → 8%PIMA COUNCIL ON AGING INC: $100k → 15%PAWS WITH A CAUSE: $100k → 8%PIMA COUNCIL ON AGING INC: $100k → 15%PIMA COUNCIL ON AGING INC: $100k → 15%PIMA COUNCIL ON AGING INC: $75k → 15%PIMA COUNCIL ON AGING INC: $75k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
MI
NY
WY
IN
CA
UT
AZ
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.
$15M · 32 repeat orgs$530k to everyone else

32 repeat relationships: 26 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

32
6

Total granted

$15M
$330k

Still filing today

69%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $200k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsEnvironmentHuman ServicesHealthArts & CultureOther
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

  • UH
    UMRC-PORTER HILLS FOUNDATION
    9× · 2017–2025 · $1.3M · revenue +97%
  • PW
    Paws With A Cause
    9× · 2017–2025 · $1.1M · revenue +86%
  • BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY
    8× · 2018–2025 · $1.0M · revenue +59%

Funded once

  • AR
    AMERICAN RED CROSS
    one grant, 2024 · $100k
  • BF
    BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SANCT
    one grant, 2017 · $75k
  • MA
    MICHIGAN ANTI CRUELTY SOC
    one grant, 2017 · $75k
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
Progressive Animal Welfare Society aka Paws

A champion for animals since 1967, PAWS is a nationally recognized leader - rehabilitating injured and orphaned wildlife, sheltering and adopting homeless cats and dogs, and educating people to make a better world for animals and people.

Animals
2
Partners for Animal Welfare Society

Animal shelter for the protection and care of abused and neglected animals.

Animals
3
Humane Society of Southern Arizona

To compassionately serve pets and the people who love them.

Animals
4
Animal Rescue of the Rockies

Animal Care and Adoption - ARR's mission is to save the lives of homeless and abandoned dogs and cats. Our goal is reaching a no-kill society in the United States.

Animals
5
Michigan Animal Rescue League

The mission of the michigan animal rescue league is to provide the highest quality of life to dogs and cats through rescue, medical care, socialization and behavioral support, short- and long-term sanctuary, adoption, and community…

Animals
6
Humane Society of Taos Inc dba Stray Hearts Animal Shelter

Stray Hearts is a socially conscious shelter and adoption facility reuniting lost pets with their families and providing humane care and shelter for surrendered, lost, and homeless companion animals in Taos County, New Mexico.Our pledge:…

Animals
7
Danbury Animal Welfare Society

Danbury animal welfare society , inc.(daws) is a non-profit organization dedicated to improving the lives of animals in our community and beyond. we promote responsible pet guardianship and the humane treatment of animals, and work toward…

Animals
8
Humane Society of Southwestern Michigan

Humane society of southwestern michigan exists to provide shelter and care for sick, homeless and unwanted animals. in addition, the organization provides adoption services for the animals in its care.

Animals
9
Animal Refuge League of Greater Portland

The Animal Refuge League of Greater Portland nurtures the connection between people and pets to advance animal welfare and improve the quality of life in our community.

Animals
10
Animal Orphanage

The mission of the Animal Orphanage is to care for and adopt out the stray or abandoned animals in our local communities. It is a no kill shelter that utilizes rigorous spay/neuter activites to reduce the number of lost and abandoned…

Animals
11
Animal Shelter of Wood River Valley Dba Mountain Humane

We are on a mission to change lives by connecting pets and people. We dothis through innovative programs that inspire and have impact beyond ourborders. We envision a compassionate community where all animals arerecognized for their…

Animals
12
Animal Samaritans

At Animal Samaritans we champion compassion and respect for all living creatures, with a primary focus on dogs, cats, and the people who love them. We view pets not merely as animals, but as members of our families. As their guardians and…

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Michigan Humane Society; the most unlike its peers is Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum. 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

26 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. 26 of the 41 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)
9
Early backer (in before they grew)
24/26
Grantees still filing
19/26
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $1,000,000 · AnimalsBEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETYMICHIGAN ANTI-CRUELTY SOCIETY: $825,000 · AnimalsMICHIGAN ANTI-CRUELTY SOCIETYHUMANE SOCIETY OF HURON VALLEY: $800,000 · AnimalsHUMANE SOCIETY OF HURON VALLEYDOG IS MY COPILOT: $775,000 · AnimalsDOG IS MY COPILOTFriends of Pima Animal Care Center: $725,000 · AnimalsFriends of Pima Animal Care CenterTucson Wildlife Center Inc: $460,000 · AnimalsTucson Wildlife Center IncPERFORMING ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY: $425,000 · AnimalsPERFORMING ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETYHORSES' HAVEN: $405,000 · AnimalsHORSES' HAVENPIMA PAWS FOR LIFE: $250,000 · AnimalsSasha Farm Inc: $242,500 · Animals+6 more: $751,000 · Animals+6 moreMICHIGAN ANIMAL RESCUE LE: $1,125,000 · OtherMICHIGAN ANIMAL RESCUE LEDIG DEEP: $675,000 · OtherDIG DEEPPRIMAVERA FUNDRAISER: $470,000 · OtherPRIMAVERA FUNDRAISERALLIANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKES: $400,000 · OtherALLIANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKESFRIENDS OF PIMA CO COUNTY ANIMAL: $375,000 · OtherFRIENDS OF PIMA CO COUNTY ANIMALCHEBOYGAN CO HUMANE SOCIETY: $330,000 · OtherCHEBOYGAN CO HUMANE SOCIETYIndividual grant recipient: $250,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientLITTLE TRAVERSE BAY HUMAN: $250,000 · OtherLITTLE TRAVERSE BAY HUMAN+9 more: $695,000 · Other+9 morePaws With A Cause: $1,125,000 · Human ServicesPaws With A…Pima Council on Aging: $450,000 · Human ServicesPima Counci…UMRC-PORTER HILLS FOUNDATION: $1,325,000 · HealthUMRC-PORT…TIP OF THE MITT WATERSHED COUNCIL: $435,000 · EnvironmentLEGACY LAND CONSERVANCY: $250,000 · EnvironmentLittle Traverse Conservancy Inc: $235,000 · EnvironmentBURT LAKE PRESERVATION ASSOCIATION: $119,500 · EnvironmentARIZONA-SONORA DESERT MUSEUM: $50,000 · Arts & Culture
Animals$6,658,500Other$4,570,000Human Services$1,575,000Health$1,325,000Environment$1,039,500Arts & Culture$50,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUMRC-PORTER HILLS FOUNDATION: $1,325,000 over 9y, 4.9% of budgetPaws With A Cause: $1,125,000 over 9y, 3.3% of budgetBEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $1,000,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetMICHIGAN ANTI-CRUELTY SOCIETY: $825,000 over 8y, 9.5% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF HURON VALLEY: $800,000 over 9y, 1.1% of budgetDOG IS MY COPILOT: $775,000 over 8y, 14% of budgetFriends of Pima Animal Care Center: $725,000 over 7y, 9.4% of budgetTucson Wildlife Center Inc: $460,000 over 8y, 4.6% of budgetPima Council on Aging: $450,000 over 5y, 0.7% of budgetTIP OF THE MITT WATERSHED COUNCIL: $435,000 over 9y, 3.6% of budgetPERFORMING ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY: $425,000 over 5y, 1.7% of budgetHORSES' HAVEN: $405,000 over 9y, 11% of budgetALLIANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKES: $400,000 over 8y, 1.3% of budgetLEGACY LAND CONSERVANCY: $250,000 over 9y, 3.0% of budgetPIMA PAWS FOR LIFE: $250,000 over 8y, 40% of budgetSasha Farm Inc: $242,500 over 9y, 17% of budgetLittle Traverse Conservancy Inc: $235,000 over 9y, 0.5% of budgetThe Hermitage No Kill Cat Shelter: $200,000 over 7y, 3.0% of budgetMICHIGAN HUMANE SOCIETY: $185,000 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetDETROIT ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $130,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetHOPE ANIMAL SHELTER: $125,000 over 5y, 11% of budgetBURT LAKE PRESERVATION ASSOCIATION: $119,500 over 8y, 14% of budgetARIZONA-SONORA DESERT MUSEUM: $50,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTrails End Wildlife Refuge Inc: $36,000 over 9y, 5.7% 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 UMRC-PORTER HILLS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Paws With A Cause ↗
  • Who funds BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds MICHIGAN ANTI-CRUELTY SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds HUMANE SOCIETY OF HURON VALLEY ↗
  • Who funds DOG IS MY COPILOT ↗
  • Who funds Friends of Pima Animal Care Center ↗
  • Who funds DIG DEEP ↗
  • Who funds Tucson Wildlife Center Inc ↗
  • Who funds Pima Council on Aging ↗
  • Who funds TIP OF THE MITT WATERSHED COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds PERFORMING ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds HORSES' HAVEN ↗
  • Who funds ALLIANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKES ↗
  • Who funds LEGACY LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds PIMA PAWS FOR LIFE ↗
  • Who funds Sasha Farm Inc ↗
  • Who funds Little Traverse Conservancy Inc ↗
  • Who funds The Hermitage No Kill Cat Shelter ↗
  • Who funds MICHIGAN HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds DETROIT ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds HOPE ANIMAL SHELTER ↗
  • Who funds BURT LAKE PRESERVATION ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds PILOTS TO THE RESCUE INC ↗
  • Who funds ARIZONA-SONORA DESERT MUSEUM ↗
  • Who funds Trails End Wildlife Refuge Inc ↗

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.

Duffy FoundationCommunity Foundation …Charles Stewart Mott …Baird Foundation IncUnited Way of Tucson …The Intuit FoundationLincoln Financial Fou…Shell USA Company Fou…Arizona Community Fou…Network for GoodJpmorgan Chase Founda…The Pfizer Foundation…
Duffy FoundationMI20× affinity7 shared granteesties to 7 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Duffy Foundation · Community Foundation for Southern Arizona · Charles Stewart Mott Foundation · Baird Foundation Inc · United Way of Tucson and Southern Arizona Inc · The Intuit Foundation · Lincoln Financial Foundation Inc · Shell USA Company Foundation · Arizona Community Foundation · Network for Good · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    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 Burt Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Burt 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 41 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 Burt’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