· Private foundation
The Brunjes Family Charitable Trust
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
Read this first · the figures below need context
73% of The Brunjes Family Charitable Trust’s FY2024 grant dollars went to World Vision Inc, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 7 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k11 grants · $17k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $18k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $311k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| WORLD VISION | $228,512 |
| JERICHO PARTNERSHIP | $82,000 |
| TISBEST PHILANTHROPY | $17,632 |
| COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF SARASOTA COUNTY | $6,000 |
| LOVE146 | $5,000 |
| JOEL OSTEEN MINISTRIES | $1,000 |
| CT AGAINST GUN VIOLENCE | $1,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,000 |
| WESTERN CONN STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION | $950 |
| PAN MASS CHALLENGE | $513 |
| IMMACULATE HIGH SCHOOL | $450 |
| WOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL | $420 |
| INTREPID MUSEUM | $250 |
| GIRLS INC OF SARASOTA COUNTY | $250 |
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 (FY17–23, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% 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 +29% since the first grant, against +19% for the ones you funded once.
22 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2024, 13 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $500 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
- WFWOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL4× · 2021–2024 · $12k · revenue +2%
- LILOVE146 INC3× · 2017–2024 · $7k · revenue +110%
- RHREGIONAL HOSPICE AND HOME CARE OF WESTERN CONNECTICUT INC2× · 2017–2023 · $1k · revenue +29%
Funded once
- GFGRACE FARMS FOUNDATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +118%
- WCWESTERN CONNECTICUT STATE UNIVone grant, 2017 · $4k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2017 · $4k
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.
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.
Operate a state-of-the-art, world-class genomic research center that creates and uses advanced genomics to understand the genetic basis of disease. for more information, see schedule o.
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…
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…
Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.
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…
Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…
The mission of the lung cancer research foundation is to improve lung cancer outcomes by funding research for the prevention, diagnosis, treatment and cure of lung cancer.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
Break through cancer is a foundation dedicated to supporting translational research in the most difficult to treat cancers. our partner organizations are among the top cancer research centers and together, represent some of the most…
To support cancer research and public education relating to prevention, earlier diagnosis, better treatments and ultimately, a cure for cancer.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is World Vision Inc and the most unlike its peers is Luis Palau Association. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 28 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 12% 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.
32 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. 32 of the 57 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 WORLD VISION INC ↗
- Who funds JERICHO PARTNERSHIP INC ↗
- Who funds TISBEST PHILANTHROPY ↗
- Who funds INFUSED IMPACT INC ↗
- Who funds WOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds THE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF SARASOTA CO INC ↗
- Who funds LOVE146 INC ↗
- Who funds GRACE FARMS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds The Giving Plan Foundation Inc The Giving Plan Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds CT Against Gun Violence Inc ↗
- Who funds REGIONAL HOSPICE AND HOME CARE OF WESTERN CONNECTICUT INC ↗
- Who funds PAN-MASSACHUSETTS CHALLENGE INC ↗
- Who funds YALE NEW HAVEN HOSPITAL ↗
- Who funds THE OCTOBER SAVES GOALIE CHALLENGE ↗
- Who funds Luis Palau Association ↗
- Who funds Copa Safety & Education Foundation ↗
- Who funds HILLSIDE FOOD OUTREACH INC ↗
- Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF SARASOTA COUNTY ↗
- Who funds AMOS HOUSE INC ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds LUPUS RESEARCH ALLIANCE INC ↗
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: Newtown Savings Bank Foundation Inc · Savings Bank of Danbury Foundation Inc · Fairfield County's Community Foundation Inc · Synchrony Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Network for Good · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
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 The Brunjes Family 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- LOVE146 Inc — 49% of income from government
- Regional Hospice and Home Care of Western Connecticut Inc — 17% of income from government
- Jericho Partnership Inc — 7% of income from government
- Nantucket Community Music Center — 1% of income from government
- Yale New Haven Hospital — 0% of income from government
- Pan-Massachusetts Challenge Inc — 0% of income from government
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 The Brunjes Family Charitable Trust?
Find your warmest path to The Brunjes Family 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.