Skip to content
Sandager Brigitte Charitable Tr at a glance

· Private foundation

Sandager Brigitte Charitable Tr

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.

$179k
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$32k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $7k
  • $10k–50k9 grants · $172k
$15,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$1.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NORTH AMERICAN BEAR CENTER$32,494
AMERICAN BEAR ASSOCIATION$25,000
PERFORMING ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY$25,000
HUMANE WORLD FOR ANIMALS INC$20,000
WORLD ANIMAL PROTECTION$20,000
WOLF HAVEN INTERNATIONAL$15,000
COMO FRIENDS$15,000
ANIMAL SANCTUARY OF THE ST CROIX VALLEY$10,000
ANIMAL HUMANE SOCIETY$10,000
WILDLIFE REHAB CENTER$5,000
INTERNATIONAL WOLF CENTER$2,000
02The need
02

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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY25–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 68% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%ANIMAL SANCTUARY OF THE ST CROIX VALLEY: $10k → 6%NORTH AMERICAN BEAR CENTER: $32k → 8%ANIMAL HUMANE SOCIETY: $10k → 11%COMO FRIENDS: $15k → 14%AMERICAN BEAR ASSOCIATION: $25k → 15%PERFORMING ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY: $25k → 12%WORLD ANIMAL PROTECTION: $20k → 17%HUMANE WORLD FOR ANIMALS INC: $20k → 14%WOLF HAVEN INTERNATIONAL: $15k → 9%INTERNATIONAL WOLF CENTER: $2k → 11%WILDLIFE REHAB CENTER: $5k → 14%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 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
Global Animal Partnership
Animals
2
Forever Wild Wildlife Rescue
Animals
3
Humane World for Animals International

HUMANE WORLD FOR ANIMALS INTERNATIONAL, FKA HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL (HSI), works around the globe to promote the human-animal bond, rescue and protect dogs and cats, improve farm animal welfare, protect wildlife, promote animal-free…

Animals
4
American Humane Association

Founded in 1877, american humane association, dba american humane society (american humane) is committed to ensuring the safety, welfare and well-being of animals. our leadership programs are first to serve in promoting and nurturing the…

Animals
5
Pom and the Hound Animal Refuge

Animal Welfare

—
6
Wild Souls Wildlife Rescue and Rehabilitation
Animals
7
Humane World Action Fund

To pass animal protection laws, educate the public, and support humane candidates for office.

Animals
8
Four Paws International Inc

Our vision is a world where humans treat animals with respect, empathy and understanding. four paws mission is to be the strong, global and independent voice for animals.

Animals
9
Bella View Farm Animal Sanctuary Inc
Animals
10
The Animal Welfare Foundation
—
11
Howlmore Animal Sanctuary Inc
Philanthropy
12
From the Heart Animal Sanctuary
Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is International Wolf Center; the most unlike its peers is World Animal Protection. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

10 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. 10 of the 11 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
5/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

AMERICAN BEAR ASSOCIATION: $25,000 · AnimalsAMERICAN BEAR ASSOCIATIONPERFORMING ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY: $25,000 · AnimalsPERFORMING ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETYHumane World for Animals Inc: $20,000 · AnimalsHumane World for Animals IncWORLD ANIMAL PROTECTION: $20,000 · AnimalsWORLD ANIMAL PROTECTIONWOLF HAVEN INTERNATIONAL: $15,000 · AnimalsWOLF HAVEN INTERNATIONALCOMO FRIENDS: $15,000 · AnimalsCOMO FRIENDSAnimal Humane Society: $10,000 · AnimalsAnimal Humane SocietyANIMAL SANCTUARY OF THE ST CROIX VALLEY: $10,000 · AnimalsANIMAL SANCTUARY OF THE ST CROIX VALLEY+1 more: $2,000 · AnimalsNORTH AMERICAN BEAR CENTER: $32,494 · Arts & CultureNORTH AMERICAN BEAR …WILDLIFE REHAB CENTER: $5,000 · Other
Animals$142,000Arts & Culture$32,494Other$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNORTH AMERICAN BEAR CENTER: $32,494 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetPERFORMING ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY: $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetWORLD ANIMAL PROTECTION: $20,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCOMO FRIENDS: $15,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetAnimal Humane Society: $10,000 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.

Mightycause Charitabl…Chubb Charitable Foun…The Blackbaud Giving …Ibm International Fou…The Pfizer Foundation…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…National Philanthropi…Morgan Stanley Global…Vanguard Charitable E…Network for GoodAmerican Online Givin…The Bank of America C…
Mightycause Charitable FoundationFL16× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Chubb Charitable Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Ibm International Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable 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 Sandager Brigitte Charitable Tr funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Sandager Brigitte Charitable Tr. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%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
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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.

    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 11 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 Sandager Brigitte Charitable Tr’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