Skip to content
The Brandt Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Brandt Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$181k
Granted FY2023
2
Grants FY2023
2
States reached
$180k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2023.

Public Benefit$252kEducation$145kReligion$144kSocial Science$110kHuman Services$84kEnvironment$66kYouth Development$50kAnimals$40kOther$0
02FY2023 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k1 grant · $500
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $180k
$180,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$5k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HERE IS BETTER FOUNDATION INC$180,000
SPCA OF WINCHESTER FREDERICK & CLARKE COUNTIES$500
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 (FY17–21, $33k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 24% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%BOULDER CREST RETREAT: $10k → 7%KATIE TEETS BRADSHAW COMFORT HOUSE: $5k → 7%BOULDER CREST RETREAT: $5k → 7%BOULDER CREST RETREAT: $5k → 7%BLUE RIDGE HOSPICE: $1k → 16%FAMILIES REACHING OUT GROUP: $1k → 16%FAMILIES REACHING OUT GROUP: $1k → 16%FAMILIES REACHING OUT GROUP: $1k → 16%FAMILIES REACHING OUT GROUP: $1k → 16%BLUE RIDGE HOSPICE: $1k → 16%BLUE RIDGE HOSPICE: $1k → 16%BLUE RIDGE HOSPICE: $1k → 16%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

NH
MA
PA
CT
CA
CO
VA
MD
DC
GA
FL
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.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$927k · 38 repeat orgs$224k to everyone else

38 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2023, 37 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

38
12

Total granted

$927k
$44k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+47%
+115%

Still filing today

61%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $180k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
EducationHuman ServicesPublic BenefitAnimalsSocial ScienceEnvironmentOther
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

  • SHENANDOAH UNIVERSITY
    3× · 2017–2021 · $118k · revenue +39%
  • CF
    CENTER FOR PARTNERSHIP SYSTEMS
    6× · 2017–2022 · $110k · revenue +36%
  • CB
    CRESTED BUTTE LAND TRUST
    2× · 2017–2018 · $65k · revenue +193%

Funded once

  • BR
    BLUE RIDGE VOLLEYBALL ASSOCIATION
    one grant, 2017 · $11k
  • EH
    EVANS HOME FOR CHILDREN
    one grant, 2021 · $7k
  • WD
    WARFIGHTER DISASTER RESPONSE TEAM
    one grant, 2018 · $5k
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
Westchester Institute for Human Development

The westchester institute for human development (wihd) creates better futures for people with disabilities, for vulnerable children, and for their families and caregivers. wihd accomplishes its mission through professional education,…

Health
2
Nantucket Conservation Foundation Inc

The nantucket conservation foundation owns, protects, and stewards over 9,000 acres of land and coastal shoreline, conserves nantucket's rare and significant natural resources, and engages in impactful ecological research to inform…

Environment
3
Winsted Health Center Inc

To provide facilities in order to maintain health care services for winchester, ct and the surrounding communities, partner with community organizations to provide health education programs and to seek healthcare providers that complement…

Health
4
Wilton Land Conservation Trust

Protecting, enhancing and conserving open spaces encompassing meadows, woodlands, wetlands, and waterways in the town of wilton ct.

Environment
5
Friends of Nathaniel Witherell Inc

Friends of nathaniel witherell is a not-for-profit organization committed to raising funds in support of the nathaniel witherell, the skilled nursing and short term rehabilitation center owned and operated by the town of greenwich, ct and…

Public Safety & Disaster
6
Wentworth Institute of Technology Inc

Wentworth institute of technology is a nationally recognized private coeducational and residential university of higher education with a mission to empower, inspire and innovate through experiential learning with a core purpose of career…

Education
7
William James College Inc

William james college strives to be a preeminent college of psychology that integrates rigorous academic instruction with extensive field education and close attention to professional development. we assume an ongoing social responsibility…

Education
8
Northeast College of Health Sciences

Northeast college of health sciences (the college) is committed to academic excellence, leadership, and professional best practices in the health sciences.

Education
9
Willamette Health Council

The willamette health council improves the well-being of residents in our region by governing our local coordinated care organization, investing in our communities, and fostering collaborative partnerships.

Health
10
Tufts Veterinary Emergency Treatment & Specialties Inc

To provide unsurpassed emergency, critical care and specialty care for companion animals while enhancing human-animal bond through superior communication between pet owner, specialist and referral veterinarian.

Health
11
Northshore Health Centers Inc

The mission of northshore health centers is to provide the most comprehensive and quality healthcare, without exclusion, to everyone, every time.

Health
12
Norwalk Community Health Center

To provide quality, innovative care that enriches the lives of our patients.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Nantucket Community Sailing Inc; the most unlike its peers is Judges Athletic Association. 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

28 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. 28 of the 52 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)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
28/28
Grantees still filing
23/28
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HERE IS BETTER FOUNDATION INC: $180,000 · OtherHERE IS BETTER FOUNDATION INCIndividual grant recipient: $149,068 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCHRIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $137,000 · OtherCHRIST EPISCOPAL CHURCHGIRL SCOUTS OF THE NATIONS CAPITAL: $50,000 · OtherGIRL SCOUTS OF THE NATIONS CAPITALSMITHSONIAN NATIONAL ZOOLOGICAL PARK: $26,000 · Other+31 more: $130,836 · Other+31 moreSHENANDOAH UNIVERSITY: $117,761 · EducationSHENANDOAH UNI…FREMONT STREET NURSERY: $6,000 · EducationTHE LOOMIS INSTITUTE D/B/A THE LOOMIS CHAFFEE SCHOOL: $6,000 · EducationJudges Athletic Association: $5,570 · EducationWHEATON COLLEGE: $5,000 · Education+1 more: $4,100 · EducationCENTER FOR PARTNERSHIP SYSTEMS: $110,000 · Social ScienceCENTER FOR…WORLD AT EASE INC: $55,520 · Public BenefitTEAM RED WHITE & BLUE INC: $16,600 · Public BenefitCRESTED BUTTE LAND TRUST: $65,000 · EnvironmentTHE LAUREL CENTER INTERVENTION FOR DOMESTIC & SEXUAL VIOLENCE: $21,000 · Human ServicesBOULDER CREST FOUNDATION: $20,000 · Human ServicesKATIE TEETS BRADSHAW COMFORT HOUSE INC: $5,000 · Human ServicesBLUE RIDGE HOSPICE INC: $4,000 · Human ServicesFAMILIES REACHING OUT GROUP: $4,000 · Human ServicesPROJECT HOPE - THE PEOPLE-TO-PEOPLE HEALTH FOUNDATION INC: $37,000 · International
Other$672,904Education$144,431Social Science$110,000Public Benefit$72,120Environment$65,000Human Services$54,000International$37,000

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 budgetSHENANDOAH UNIVERSITY: $117,761 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetCENTER FOR PARTNERSHIP SYSTEMS: $110,000 over 6y, 12% of budgetCRESTED BUTTE LAND TRUST: $65,000 over 2y, 6.5% of budgetWORLD AT EASE INC: $55,520 over 3y, 10% of budgetPROJECT HOPE - THE PEOPLE-TO-PEOPLE HEALTH FOUNDATION INC: $37,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetTHE LAUREL CENTER INTERVENTION FOR DOMESTIC & SEXUAL VIOLENCE: $21,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetBOULDER CREST FOUNDATION: $20,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetDR TERRY SINCLAIR HEALTH CLINIC INC: $17,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetTEAM RED WHITE & BLUE INC: $16,600 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetFREMONT STREET NURSERY: $6,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetTHE LOOMIS INSTITUTE D/B/A THE LOOMIS CHAFFEE SCHOOL: $6,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetKIWANIS CLUB OF WINCHESTER: $5,945 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetKATIE TEETS BRADSHAW COMFORT HOUSE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetWHEATON COLLEGE: $5,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetTrustees of Dartmouth College: $4,100 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetBLUE RIDGE HOSPICE INC: $4,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetFAMILIES REACHING OUT GROUP: $4,000 over 4y, 1.2% of budgetSPCA OF WINCHESTER FREDERICK AND CLARKE COUNTIES: $3,100 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetNANTUCKET SAFE HARBOR FOR ANIMALS INC: $2,200 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetNANTUCKET PRESERVATION TRUST INC: $2,200 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetNANTUCKET COMMUNITY SAILING INC: $1,700 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetNANTUCKET ATHENEUM INC: $1,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNW WORKS INC: $1,200 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetWINCHESTER AREA TEMPORARY THERMAL SHELTER INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetAIDS RESPONSE EFFORT INC D/B/A/ COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE FUND: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATURE CAMP FOUNDATION INC: $500 over 1y, 0.3% 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 SHENANDOAH UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds CENTER FOR PARTNERSHIP SYSTEMS ↗
  • Who funds CRESTED BUTTE LAND TRUST ↗
  • Who funds WORLD AT EASE INC ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT HOPE - THE PEOPLE-TO-PEOPLE HEALTH FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds THE LAUREL CENTER INTERVENTION FOR DOMESTIC & SEXUAL VIOLENCE ↗
  • Who funds BOULDER CREST FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds DR TERRY SINCLAIR HEALTH CLINIC INC ↗
  • Who funds TEAM RED WHITE & BLUE INC ↗
  • Who funds FREMONT STREET NURSERY ↗
  • Who funds THE LOOMIS INSTITUTE D/B/A THE LOOMIS CHAFFEE SCHOOL ↗
  • Who funds KIWANIS CLUB OF WINCHESTER ↗
  • Who funds Judges Athletic Association ↗
  • Who funds KATIE TEETS BRADSHAW COMFORT HOUSE INC ↗
  • Who funds WHEATON COLLEGE ↗
  • Who funds Trustees of Dartmouth College ↗
  • Who funds BLUE RIDGE HOSPICE INC ↗
  • Who funds FAMILIES REACHING OUT GROUP ↗
  • Who funds SPCA OF WINCHESTER FREDERICK AND CLARKE COUNTIES ↗

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 Bank of Clarke Co…American Woodmark Fou…United Way of Norther…John L Harrell & Marg…Feltner Community Fou…Andrew U Ferrari Foun…Valley Health SystemThe Community Foundat…The Community Foundat…The Woltz-Winchester …Dorothy M Overcash Ch…The Clara Weiss Fund
The Bank of Clarke County FoundationVA30.4× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Bank of Clarke County Foundation · American Woodmark Foundation Inc · United Way of Northern Shenandoah Valley Inc · John L Harrell & Margaret T Harrell Charitable Trust C/O First Bank Trustee · Feltner Community Foundation · Andrew U Ferrari Foundation · Valley Health System · The Community Foundation of the Northern Shenandoah Valley · The Community Foundation of Harrisonburg & Rockingham County · The Woltz-Winchester Foundation · Dorothy M Overcash Charitable Trust First Bank Trustee · The Clara Weiss Fund

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Wheaton College: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get 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 · 0–50%
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 The Brandt Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Brandt 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 52 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder made grants.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Brandt’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