Skip to content
The Brookby Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Brookby Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$3.5M
Granted FY2024still arriving
151
Grants FY2024still arriving
23
States reached
$500k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Environment$8.7MArts & Culture$6.5MEducation$1.9MFood & Nutrition$1.7MPublic Benefit$1.0MHuman Services$613kScience & Tech$588kHealth$483kOther$0
02FY2024 · 151 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k90 grants · $105k
  • $10k–50k34 grants · $714k
  • $50k–250k26 grants · $2.1M
  • $250k+1 grant · $500k
$1,500
Median grant
23
States reached
$31M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Oregon Symphony$500,000
UWM Foundation Inc$200,000
Inland Seas Education Association$200,000
Grand Rapids Symphony$166,423
Dairy Grazing Apprenticeship$160,000
Individual grant recipient$100,000
Urban Ecology Center$100,000
URBAN ECOLOGY CENTER$90,000
Michigan Civic Education Fund$75,000
Mote Marine Laboratory$75,000
Action for the Climate Emergency (ACE)$75,000
Michigan League of Conservation Voters Education$75,000
Wisconsin Conservation Voices$70,000
Leelanau Conservancy$70,000
Environmental Law & Policy Center$60,000
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 (FY17–24, $423k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 98% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%NORTHWESTERN MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY: $5k → 10%HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN: $60k → 11%Hospice of Michigan: $15k → 11%Tides Center: $30k → 14%Generations Ahead: $200 → 10%HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN: $10k → 11%GENERATIONS AHEAD: $200 → 10%HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN: $10k → 11%GENERATIONS AHEAD: $200 → 10%HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN: $10k → 11%Hospice of Michigan: $10k → 11%HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN: $10k → 11%HOSPICE OF MICHIGAN: $10k → 11%Neu Life Community Development: $400 → 17%NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE: $5k → 17%NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE: $5k → 17%NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE: $5k → 17%NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE: $5k → 17%NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE: $5k → 17%Neighborhood House of Milwaukee: $5k → 17%Neighborhood House of Milwaukee: $5k → 17%NORTHWEST MICHIGAN SUPPORTIVE HOUSING: $500 → 7%Northwest Michigan Supportive Housing: $500 → 7%NORTHWEST MICHIGAN SUPPORTIVE HOUSING: $500 → 7%NORTHWEST MICHIGAN SUPPORTIVE HOUSING: $300 → 7%INNOCENCE PROJECT INC: $500 → 17%INNOCENCE PROJECT INC: $500 → 17%YWCA West Central Michigan: $25k → 11%INNOCENCE PROJECT INC: $500 → 17%YWCA WEST CENTRAL MICHIGAN: $20k → 11%Innocence Project Inc: $500 → 17%YWCA WEST CENTRAL MICHIGAN: $20k → 11%INNOCENCE PROJECT INC: $500 → 17%INNOCENCE PROJECT INC: $500 → 17%YWCA West Central Michigan: $20k → 11%Sojourner Family Peace Center: $600 → 17%YWCA WEST CENTRAL MICHIGAN: $20k → 11%Sojourner Family Peace Center: $500 → 17%YWCA WEST CENTRAL MICHIGAN: $20k → 11%YWCA WEST CENTRAL MICHIGAN: $20k → 11%SOJOURNER FAMILY PEACE CENTER: $500 → 17%SOJOURNER FAMILY PEACE CENTER: $500 → 17%SOJOURNER FAMILY PEACE CENTER: $500 → 17%SOJOURNER FAMILY PEACE CENTER: $500 → 17%YWCA WEST CENTRAL MICHIGAN: $7k → 11%SOJOURNER FAMILY PEACE CENTER: $300 → 17%VOCES DE LA FRONTERA: $5k → 17%Together Wisconsin: $50k → 17%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

ME
WA
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
IA
PA
NJ
CT
CA
UT
CO
NE
VA
MD
DE
AZ
TN
NC
DC
LA
GA
TX
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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$21M · 193 repeat orgs$990k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +49% since the first grant, against +30% for those funded once.

193 repeat relationships: 129 still active in FY2024, 64 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

193
73

Total granted

$21M
$757k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+49%
+30%

Still filing today

81%
47%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $233k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentArts & CultureInternationalHealthEducationCivil RightsOther
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

  • THE UWM FOUNDATION INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $1.5M · revenue +35%
  • DG
    DAIRY GRAZING ALLIANCE INC
    7× · 2018–2024 · $1.1M · revenue +223%
  • URBAN ECOLOGY CENTER INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $1.0M · revenue +113%

Funded once

  • GR
    GRAND RAPIDS BALLETgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $60k · revenue +59%
  • LC
    Land Conservancy of West Michigan
    one grant, 2018 · $50k · revenue -65%
  • TW
    TOGETHER WISCONSIN INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $50k · revenue +42%
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
The Water Research Foundation

The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…

Environment
2
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
3
World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…

International
4
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
5
American Water Works Association

To promote public health, safety, and welfare through the improvement of the quality and quantity of drinking water and the development and furtherance of understanding of the problems relating thereto.

Public Benefit
6
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
7
Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy

The minnesota center for environmental advocacy is a nonprofit organization that uses law, science and research to protect minnesota's environment, its natural resources and the health of its people.

Environment
8
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation

To sustain, restore, and enhance the nation's fish, wildlife, plants, and habitats.

Animals
9
National Association of Clean Water Agencies

Nacwa is the national voice of public clean water utilities, shaping water policy, convening a vibrant peer network, and empowering water leaders.

—
10
Minnesota Land Trust

The minnesota land trust protects and restores minnesota's most vital natural lands in order to provide wildlife habitat, clean water, outdoor experiences and scenic beauty for generations to come.

Environment
11
Wisconsin Policy Forum Inc

We conduct impartial public policy research and analysis to drive informed debate and effective decision-making in the state of wisconsin.

Public Benefit
12
Michigan Enviromental Council

Informing and educating the public and decision makers about environmental issues.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Alliance for the Great Lakes; the most unlike its peers is Humane World for Animals International. 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

211 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 211 of the 289 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)
55
Early backer (in before they grew)
207/211
Grantees still filing
158/211
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

URBAN ECOLOGY CENTER INC: $1,005,000 · EnvironmentURBAN ECOLOGY CENTER INCGRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY: $800,000 · EnvironmentGRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CON…LEELANAU CONSERVANCY: $610,000 · EnvironmentLEELANAU CONSERVANCYWISCONSIN CONSERVATION VOICES INC: $500,000 · EnvironmentWISCONSIN CONSERVATION VOICES IN…ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND POLICY CENTER OF THE MIDWEST: $480,000 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND POLICY CEN…MILWAUKEE RIVERKEEPER INC: $373,000 · EnvironmentMILWAUKEE RIVERKEEPER INCINLAND SEAS EDUCATION ASSOCIATION: $344,000 · EnvironmentRIVEREDGE NATURE CENTER INC: $308,000 · EnvironmentCLEAN WISCONSIN INC: $270,000 · EnvironmentMequon Nature Preserve Inc: $215,951 · Environment+31 more: $1,568,555 · Environment+31 moreGrand Rapids Symphony: $1,184,539 · OtherGrand Rapids SymphonyMOTE MARINE LABORATORY INC: $575,000 · OtherMOTE MARINE LABORATORY INCALLIANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKES: $500,000 · OtherALLIANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKESMICHIGAN LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION: $450,000 · OtherMICHIGAN LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VO…Peabody Institute of The Johns Hopkins University: $440,000 · OtherPeabody Institute of The Johns Hop…DA BLODGETT - ST JOHN'S: $415,000 · OtherDA BLODGETT - ST JOHN'SHUNGER TASK FORCE INC: $230,000 · Other+94 more: $3,024,417 · Other+94 moreOREGON SYMPHONY ASSOCIATION: $3,048,467 · Arts & CultureOREGON SYMPHONY ASSOCI…INTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $340,000 · Arts & CultureINTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR…SO PERCUSSION INC: $336,000 · Arts & CultureSO PERCUSSION INC+21 more: $735,200 · Arts & Culture+21 moreTHE UWM FOUNDATION INC: $1,485,000 · EducationTHE UWM FOU…Aquinas College: $204,950 · EducationAquinas Col…BLANDFORD NATURE CENTER: $180,000 · EducationBLANDFORD N…BELOIT COLLEGE: $136,500 · EducationBELOIT COLL…WISCONSIN PROGRESS INSTITUTE INC: $90,000 · Education+6 more: $97,500 · EducationDAIRY GRAZING ALLIANCE INC: $1,125,000 · Food & Nutrition+1 more: $4,000 · Food & NutritionMICHIGAN CIVIC EDUCATION FUND: $250,000 · Civil RightsWISCONSIN VOICES INC: $200,000 · Civil RightsAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION INC: $155,000 · Civil RightsONE ARIZONA: $76,000 · Civil RightsPENNSYLVANIA VOICE: $65,000 · Civil RightsSTATE VOICES: $48,000 · Civil RightsPROGEORGIA STATE TABLE INC: $46,000 · Civil Rights+4 more: $64,000 · Civil RightsYWCA WEST CENTRAL MICHIGAN: $152,000 · Human ServicesHospice of Michigan Inc: $135,000 · Human ServicesTOGETHER WISCONSIN INC: $50,000 · Human ServicesNEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE INC: $35,000 · Human ServicesTIDES CENTER: $30,000 · Human Services+5 more: $19,200 · Human Services
Environment$6,474,506Other$6,818,956Arts & Culture$4,459,667Education$2,193,950Food & Nutrition$1,129,000Civil Rights$904,000Human Services$421,200

Showing the 200 largest grantees by grant value.

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetOREGON SYMPHONY ASSOCIATION: $3,048,467 over 8y, 3.6% of budgetTHE UWM FOUNDATION INC: $1,485,000 over 8y, 1.5% of budgetDAIRY GRAZING ALLIANCE INC: $1,125,000 over 7y, 24% of budgetURBAN ECOLOGY CENTER INC: $1,005,000 over 8y, 3.4% of budgetGRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY: $800,000 over 8y, 1.8% of budgetLEELANAU CONSERVANCY: $610,000 over 8y, 1.7% of budgetMOTE MARINE LABORATORY INC: $575,000 over 8y, 0.4% of budgetWISCONSIN CONSERVATION VOICES INC: $500,000 over 8y, 8.4% of budgetALLIANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKES: $500,000 over 8y, 3.5% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND POLICY CENTER OF THE MIDWEST: $480,000 over 8y, 0.8% of budgetDA BLODGETT - ST JOHN'S: $415,000 over 8y, 0.5% of budgetMILWAUKEE RIVERKEEPER INC: $373,000 over 8y, 9.7% of budgetINLAND SEAS EDUCATION ASSOCIATION: $344,000 over 5y, 6.6% of budgetINTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $340,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetSO PERCUSSION INC: $336,000 over 8y, 6.8% of budgetRIVEREDGE NATURE CENTER INC: $308,000 over 8y, 2.6% of budgetCLEAN WISCONSIN INC: $270,000 over 8y, 2.2% of budgetMICHIGAN CIVIC EDUCATION FUND: $250,000 over 5y, 2.4% of budgetHUNGER TASK FORCE INC: $230,000 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetTROUT UNLIMITED INC: $224,874 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetMequon Nature Preserve Inc: $215,951 over 8y, 3.8% of budgetAquinas College: $204,950 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetWISCONSIN VOICES INC: $200,000 over 6y, 5.8% of budgetCONSERVATION RESOURCE ALLIANCE: $200,000 over 4y, 2.6% of budgetJAPANESE GARDEN SOCIETY OF OREGON: $200,000 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetCIRCLE OF BLUE INC: $192,500 over 7y, 17% of budgetBLANDFORD NATURE CENTER: $180,000 over 3y, 3.1% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION INC: $155,000 over 7y, 2.3% of budgetYWCA WEST CENTRAL MICHIGAN: $152,000 over 8y, 0.5% of budget45th Parallel: $147,000 over 7y, 16% of budgetCAMP BLODGETT: $144,000 over 6y, 2.7% of budgetBELOIT COLLEGE: $136,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetSIXTEENTH STREET COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS INC: $135,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetHospice of Michigan Inc: $135,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetSEEDS: $132,200 over 6y, 1.7% of budgetGOODPOWER EDUCATION FUND INC: $120,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MICHIGAN: $119,130 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetHARBOR DISTRICT INC: $110,000 over 7y, 3.5% of budgetGRAND RAPIDS ART MUSEUM: $100,000 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetMICHIGAN LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $100,000 over 2y, 6.3% of budgetNATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION: $90,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES FOUNDATION OF: $89,000 over 8y, 0.4% of budgetMILWAUKEE WATER COMMONS INC: $78,000 over 7y, 1.6% of budgetONE ARIZONA: $76,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetRIVER REVITALIZATION FOUNDATION INC: $75,000 over 5y, 12% of budgetGATHERING WATERS INC: $70,000 over 2y, 4.9% of budgetPENNSYLVANIA VOICE: $65,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetWEST MICHIGAN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION COUNCIL EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $62,551 over 8y, 1.8% 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 OREGON SYMPHONY ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds THE UWM FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds DAIRY GRAZING ALLIANCE INC ↗
  • Who funds URBAN ECOLOGY CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds GRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds LEELANAU CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds MOTE MARINE LABORATORY INC ↗
  • Who funds WISCONSIN CONSERVATION VOICES INC ↗
  • Who funds ALLIANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKES ↗
  • Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND POLICY CENTER OF THE MIDWEST ↗
  • Who funds DA BLODGETT - ST JOHN'S ↗
  • Who funds MILWAUKEE RIVERKEEPER INC ↗
  • Who funds INLAND SEAS EDUCATION ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds INTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS ↗
  • Who funds SO PERCUSSION INC ↗
  • Who funds RIVEREDGE NATURE CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds CLEAN WISCONSIN INC ↗
  • Who funds MICHIGAN CIVIC EDUCATION FUND ↗
  • Who funds HUNGER TASK FORCE INC ↗
  • Who funds TROUT UNLIMITED INC ↗
  • Who funds Mequon Nature Preserve Inc ↗
  • Who funds Aquinas College ↗
  • Who funds WISCONSIN VOICES INC ↗
  • Who funds CONSERVATION RESOURCE ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds JAPANESE GARDEN SOCIETY OF OREGON ↗
  • Who funds CIRCLE OF BLUE INC ↗
  • Who funds BLANDFORD NATURE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds YWCA WEST CENTRAL MICHIGAN ↗
  • Who funds 45th Parallel ↗
  • Who funds CAMP BLODGETT ↗
  • Who funds BELOIT COLLEGE ↗
  • Who funds SIXTEENTH STREET COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS INC ↗
  • Who funds Hospice of Michigan Inc ↗
  • Who funds SEEDS ↗

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.

Greater Milwaukee Fou…Frey FoundationWindward FundHerbert H Kohl Charit…Grand Rapids Communit…DTE Energy FoundationThe Wege FoundationOleson FoundationThe Meijer FoundationPatagoniaorgNational Fish and Wil…Grand Traverse Region…
Greater Milwaukee Foundation IncWI57.7× affinity33 shared granteesties to 8 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Greater Milwaukee Foundation Inc · Frey Foundation · Windward Fund · Herbert H Kohl Charities Inc · Grand Rapids Community Foundation · DTE Energy Foundation · The Wege Foundation · Oleson Foundation · The Meijer Foundation · Patagoniaorg · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Grand Traverse Regional Community Foundation

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 140%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Associated Scientists at Woods Hole Inc: 54% of income from government
  • Mercy Corps: 47% of income from government
  • Save the Children Federation Inc: 30% of income from government
  • Oregon Food Bank: 21% of income from government
  • Associated Catholic Charities Inc: 10% of income from government
  • Mote Marine Laboratory Inc: 4% of income from government
  • Third Angle New Music Ensemble: 3% of income from government
  • Chamber Music Northwest: 3% of income from government
  • Wgbh Educational Foundation: 1% of income from government
  • Metropolitan Youth Symphony: 1% of income from government
  • Oregon Public Broadcasting: 1% of income from government
  • Sandy Hook Promise Foundation: 0% of income from government
  • Americares Foundation Inc: 0% of income from government
  • Oregon Symphony Association: 0% of income from government
  • Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation: 0% of income from government
  • Portland State University Foundation: 0% of income from government
  • Oxfam-America Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
14get no government money at all
53report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
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 Brookby Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Brookby 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 289 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Brookby’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