Skip to content
The Burkland Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Burkland Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$170k
Granted FY2024still arriving
9
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$35k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

Health$600kArts & Culture$100kEnvironment$78kEducation$55kYouth Development$50kHousing & Shelter$25kHuman Services$10kOther$0
02FY2024 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $165k
$20,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$3.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Childrens Hospital of Pittsburgh Foundation$35,000
Carnegie Institute$25,000
Center for Community Action$25,000
U Power$20,000
Fred Hutchison Cancer Research$20,000
Magee Women's Research Institute and Foundation$20,000
Children's Hospital of Chicago$10,000
Western Pennsylvania Conservancy$10,000
Fort Ligonier$5,000
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 (FY22–22, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%The Stoneybrook Foundation: $10k → 10%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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$813k · 8 repeat orgs$120k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +62% since the first grant, against +32% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
4

Total granted

$813k
$80k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+62%
+32%

Still filing today

75%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 76% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $40k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthArts & CultureEducationEnvironmentPhilanthropyHuman 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

  • CH
    CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PITTSBURGH FOUNDATION
    6× · 2019–2024 · $160k · revenue +61%
  • MR
    MAGEE-WOMENS RESEARCH INSTITUTE AND FOUNDATION
    6× · 2019–2024 · $110k · revenue +13%
  • CI
    CARNEGIE INSTITUTE
    4× · 2019–2024 · $68k · revenue +62%

Funded once

  • STEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $35k · revenue +50%
  • IF
    INSTITUTE FOR SHIPBOARD EDUCATION
    one grant, 2023 · $20k · revenue +12%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $15k
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
Point Park University

Provides innovative education in a dynamic urban setting. dedicated to academic excellence and community engagement,we prepare students of diverse backgrounds with the knowledge, skill,and experience to lead meaningful lives as informed…

—
2
United States Naval Institute

Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.

—
3
Wilson College

Wilson college empowers students to be confident and critical thinkers, creative visionaries, effective communicators, honorable leaders, and agents of justice.

Education
4
Greater Philadelphia Tourism Marketing Corporation

Visit philadelphia is our name and our mission. as the region's official tourism marketing agency, we build greater philadelphia's image, drive visitation and boost the economy.

Community Improvement
5
Stony Brook Internists University Faculty Practice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
6
Stony Brook Urology University Faculty Practice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
7
Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc

Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…

Community Improvement
8
Upmc Western Maryland Corporation

The mission of upmc western maryland is to serve our community by providing outstanding patient care and to shape tomorrow's health system through clinical & technological innovation, research and education.

Health
9
Gettysburg College

Gettysburg college is a residential, undergraduate college of the liberal arts and sciences.

Education
10
University of Pittsburgh

The university of pittsburgh, founded in 1787, is one of the oldest institutions of higher education in the united states and one of the nation's top public research universities. for more than two centuries, the university of pittsburgh…

Education
11
Stony Brook Surgical Associates University Faculty Practice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
12
University Associates in Obstetrics and Gynecology University Faculty Pract ice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Carnegie Institute; the most unlike its peers is Stoneybrook Foundation. 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

11 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. 11 of the 15 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
10/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Fred Hutchison Cancer Research: $320,000 · OtherFred Hutchison Cancer ResearchForterra Formarly Cascade Land Conservancy: $27,500 · OtherForterra Formarly Cascade Land ConservancyIndividual grant recipient: $15,000 · Other+1 more: $10,000 · OtherCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PITTSBURGH FOUNDATION: $160,000 · HealthCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PITTSBURGH FOUN…MAGEE-WOMENS RESEARCH INSTITUTE AND FOUNDATION: $110,000 · HealthMAGEE-WOMENS RESEARCH INSTITUTE AND FO…UPOWER: $50,000 · HealthUPOWERCARNEGIE INSTITUTE: $67,500 · Arts & CultureFORT LIGONIER ASSOCIATION: $5,000 · Arts & CultureSTEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION: $35,000 · EducationINSTITUTE FOR SHIPBOARD EDUCATION: $20,000 · EducationWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY: $50,000 · EnvironmentWESTMORELAND CULTURAL TRUST: $27,500 · PhilanthropyCENTER FOR COMMUNITY ACTION: $25,000 · Housing & ShelterSTONEYBROOK FOUNDATION: $10,000 · Human Services
Other$372,500Health$320,000Arts & Culture$72,500Education$55,000Environment$50,000Philanthropy$27,500Housing & Shelter$25,000Human Services$10,000

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 budgetCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PITTSBURGH FOUNDATION: $160,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetMAGEE-WOMENS RESEARCH INSTITUTE AND FOUNDATION: $110,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetCARNEGIE INSTITUTE: $67,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY: $50,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetUPOWER: $50,000 over 3y, 2.9% of budgetSTEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION: $35,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWESTMORELAND CULTURAL TRUST: $27,500 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetCENTER FOR COMMUNITY ACTION: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR SHIPBOARD EDUCATION: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSTONEYBROOK FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetFORT LIGONIER ASSOCIATION: $5,000 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.

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile Foundation
Amazonsmile FoundationWA2.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Burkland Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Burkland Foundation. 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
    2report 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 15 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 Burkland’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