Skip to content
The Brougher Family Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

The Brougher Family Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$17k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Animals$51kArts & Culture$35kHealth$34kEnvironment$20kReligion$20kEducation$10kHuman Services$4kInternational$4kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $2k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $15k
$1,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$774k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE CHILDREN'S MUSEUM OF INDIANAPOLIS$15,000
THE LEUKEMIA & LYMPHOMA SOCIETY$1,000
LLBM CLOTHE A CHILD$1,000
BRAVE BACKERS INC$250
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 (FY17–17, $500) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%SAMANTHA'S HOUSE FOUNDATION: $500 → 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.
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.

46%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$84k · 7 repeat orgs$98k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +53% since the first grant, against +4% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
13

Total granted

$84k
$97k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+53%
+4%

Still filing today

57%
62%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $250 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthArts & CultureEnvironmentPublic BenefitHousing & ShelterHuman ServicesOther
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

  • TC
    The Children's Museum of Indianapolis Inc
    5× · 2021–2025 · $35k · revenue +53%
  • IC
    INDIANA CANINE ASSISTANT NETWORK INC
    2× · 2020–2022 · $20k · revenue +122%
  • Y
    YAMPATIKA
    2× · 2021–2022 · $20k · revenue +47%

Funded once

  • SL
    STEAMBOAT LOCAL LOVE INC
    one grant, 2020 · $30k
  • OH
    OPEN HAND INC
    one grant, 2024 · $10k
  • CM
    COLORADO MOUNTAIN COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2024 · $10k · revenue +4%
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
Children's Hospital Colorado

To improve the health of children through the provision of high-quality, coordinated programs of patient care, education, research and advocacy.

Health
2
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc

The mission of dfci is to provide expert, compassionate, and equitable care to children, adults, and their families, while advancing the understanding, diagnosis, treatment, cure, and prevention of cancer and related diseases. we train new…

Health
3
Lehigh Valley Hospital

Our mission is to heal, comfort and care for the people of our community by providing advanced and compassionate health care of superior quality and value, supported by education and research.

Health
4
American Lung Association

The american lung association's mission is to save lives by improving lung health and preventing lung disease. we do this through education, advocacy, and research.

Health
5
Colorado Health Institute
Health
6
Colorado Rural Health Center

To enhance healthcare services in the state by providing information, education, linkages, tools and energy towards addressing rural health issues.

Health
7
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center

As a leading academic healthcare organization, our mission is to elevate the health status of the communities we serve.(see schedule o for continuation)(continued)-we deliver exceptional healthcare enhanced by research and education-we…

Health
8
The Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Foundation Inc

Susan g. komen has an unmatched, comprehensive 360-degree approach to fighting breast cancer across all fronts and supporting millions of people in the u.s. and in countries worldwide. we advocate for policies to protect patients, drive…

Health
9
Critical Path Institute

The critical path institute is a catalyst in the development of new approaches that advance medical innovation and regulatory science. this is achieved by leading teams that share data, knowledge and expertise resulting in sound, consensus…

Health
10
The Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Fdn Group

Susan g. komen 's mission is to save lives by meeting the most critical needs in our communities & investing in breakthrough research to prevent & cure breast cancer.

—
11
Hydrocephalus Association

Find a cure for hyrocephalus and improve the lives of those impacted. we will accomplish this by collaborating with patients, caregivers, researchers and industry, raising awareness, and funding innovative, high-impact research to prevent,…

Health
12
Children's Health Care

We champion the health needs of children and families. we are committed to improving children's health by providing the highest-quality, family centered care, advanced through research and education.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Kids Cancer Alliance Inc; the most unlike its peers is Steamboat Local Love Inc. 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

13 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. 13 of the 21 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/13
Grantees still filing
9/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

STEAMBOAT LOCAL LOVE INC: $30,000 · OtherSTEAMBOAT LOCAL LOVE INCOPEN HAND INC: $10,000 · OtherOPEN HAND INCCOLORADO MOUNTAIN COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 · OtherCOLORADO MOUNTAIN COLLEGE FOUNDATION INCREACHING EVERYONE PREVENTING SUICIDE INC: $10,000 · OtherREACHING EVERYONE PREVENTING SUICIDE INCFIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH: $10,000 · OtherFIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCHKIWANIS INTERNATIONAL: $3,500 · Other+6 more: $7,550 · Other+6 moreThe Children's Museum of Indianapolis Inc: $35,000 · Arts & CultureThe Children's Museum…INDIANA CANINE ASSISTANT NETWORK INC: $20,000 · HealthINDIANA CANINE ASSIS…THE DREAM FACTORY INC: $10,000 · HealthTHE DREAM FACTORY IN…BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $2,000 · HealthBLOOD CANCER UNITED …+1 more: $500 · HealthYAMPATIKA: $20,000 · EnvironmentYAMPATIKAKIDS CANCER ALLIANCE INC: $10,000 · Public BenefitHVAF OF INDIANA INC: $2,500 · Housing & ShelterSAMANTHA'S HOUSE FOUNDATION INC: $500 · Human Services
Other$81,050Arts & Culture$35,000Health$32,500Environment$20,000Public Benefit$10,000Housing & Shelter$2,500Human Services$500

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 budgetThe Children's Museum of Indianapolis Inc: $35,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetINDIANA CANINE ASSISTANT NETWORK INC: $20,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetYAMPATIKA: $20,000 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetCOLORADO MOUNTAIN COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetREACHING EVERYONE PREVENTING SUICIDE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetKIDS CANCER ALLIANCE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetTHE DREAM FACTORY INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetHVAF OF INDIANA INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetRoutt County Humane Society: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSAMANTHA'S HOUSE FOUNDATION INC: $500 over 1y, 0.5% 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.

Colorado Gives Founda…American Endowment Fo…Morgan Stanley Global…Charities Aid Foundat…Network for GoodNational Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Colorado Gives FoundationCO12.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Colorado Gives Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · Network for Good · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Brougher Family Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Brougher Family Foundation Inc. 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%25%50%75%100%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
    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 21 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 Brougher Family’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