· Private foundation
Jeffrey J and Mary E Burdge Charitable Trust
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 75% of JEFFREY J AND MARY E BURDGE CHARITABLE TRUST’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k17 grants · $68k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $30k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Individual grant recipient | $20,000 |
| BRAIN AND BEHAVIOR RESEARCH FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| BATTLE SCARRED MOTORSPORTS | $5,000 |
| HUGS CAFE INC | $5,000 |
| FRIENDS OF CLAY COUNTY CASA | $5,000 |
| TREATMENT ADVOCACY CENTER | $5,000 |
| KEYSTONE HUMAN SERVICES | $5,000 |
| BAZELON CENTER | $5,000 |
| FUND FOR WOMEN OF THE SOUTHERN TIER | $5,000 |
| NATIONAL ALLIANCE OF THE MENTALLY ILL | $5,000 |
| KANBE'S MARKET KANSAS CITY | $5,000 |
| MENTAL HEALTH AMERICA OF THE HEARTLAND | $5,000 |
| AMERICAN CONFERENCE GOVERNMENTAL INDUSTRIAL HYGENISTS | $5,000 |
| SAFEHOME OF JOHNSON COUNTY KS | $4,000 |
| CORNING MUSEUM GLASS STUDIO EXPANSION | $2,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $56k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 78% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +28% since the first grant, against -2% for the ones you funded once.
30 repeat relationships — 11 still active in FY2025, 19 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 65% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $34k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- NANATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR RESEARCH ON SCHIZOPHRENIA AND DEPRESSION9× · 2017–2025 · $141k · revenue +60%
- TATREATMENT ADVOCACY CENTER5× · 2021–2025 · $65k · revenue +28%
- PSPAXTON STREET HOME BENEVOLENT SOCIETY3× · 2017–2019 · $44k · revenue +83%
Funded once
- KCKEYSTONE COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES OF PAone grant, 2020 · $6k
- BCBLOOD CANCER UNITED INCone grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue -25%
- ACAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INCone grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue -80%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
To make a meaningful difference through healthcare innovation and caring for the whole person.
The policy center is improving maternal mental health outcomes through closing gaps in care delivery, including improving detection and access to evidence-based and informed clinical and community-based care. the policy center has been…
Our mission is to break down barriers to als research to find effective treatments. by uniting academia, the pharma and biotech industry, government, venture capital, related nonprofits, and the als community, we aim to overcome the…
To create and lead alliances and public-private partnerships that advance breakthrough biomedical discoveries and improve the quality of people's lives
Altarum is focused on improving the health of individuals with fewer financial resources and populations disenfranchised by the health care system. we drive impactful changes in four domains: 1) transform health service delivery - we work…
The professional, scientific, and credentialing association for clinical and research based audiologists and speech-language pathologists. empowering and supporting speech-language pathologists, audiologists, and speech, language, and…
We inspire thinkers from different disciplines to combine their efforts for a common purpose: healthcare innovation.(continued on schedule o)from bioinformatics to cancer research and beyond, we stimulate collaboration and help bring…
University health is an academic health center providing accessible, state-of-the-art quality healthcare to our community regardless of the ability to pay.
2025 was a turbulent year for the medical and health research community, but our commitment to advocating for science never wavered. from pushing back against funding threats to elevating researchers' voices and equipping advocates, we…
To provide research and technical assistance in the fields of intellectual and developmental disabilities, population health, substance use and prevention, mental health and child and family services.
The Academy's mission is to enhance member career fulfillment and promote brain health for all.
To improve the lives of individuals, families, and communities impacted by substance abuse and behavioral health disorders.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Safehome Inc and the most unlike its peers is Saint Lukes Foundation of Cleveland Ohio. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 39 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
22 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 22 of the 50 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR RESEARCH ON SCHIZOPHRENIA AND DEPRESSION ↗
- Who funds TREATMENT ADVOCACY CENTER ↗
- Who funds PAXTON STREET HOME BENEVOLENT SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds AFTER THE HARVEST ↗
- Who funds FUND FOR WOMEN OF THE SOUTHERN TIER INC ↗
- Who funds SAINT LUKES FOUNDATION OF CLEVELAND OHIO ↗
- Who funds MENTAL HEALTH AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds SAFEHOME INC ↗
- Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds Saint Lukes Foundation ↗
- Who funds TELLURIDE SCIENCE ↗
- Who funds HUGS CAFE INC ↗
- Who funds BATTLE SCARRED MOTORSPORTS ↗
- Who funds KEYSTONE HUMAN SERVICES ↗
- Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds JOCO IHN INC ↗
- Who funds TENFOLD ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Greater Kansas City Community Foundation · Greater Horizons · Menorah Heritage Foundation · Jewish Community Foundation of Greater Kansas City · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Jeffrey J and Mary E Burdge Charitable Trust funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Jeffrey J and Mary E Burdge Charitable Trust?
Find your warmest path to Jeffrey J and Mary E Burdge Charitable Trust 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.