· Public charity
The Kelly S Brush Foundation Inc
To inspire and empower people with spinal cord injuries to lead active and engaged lives.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 7 grants below total $104,553 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $1,124,376 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $1,019,823 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k3 grants · $20k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $85k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CRAIG HOSPITAL FOUNDATION | $23,579 |
| OREGON ADAPTIVE SPORTS | $22,700 |
| VERMONT ADAPTIVE SKI AND SPORTS | $19,999 |
| VERMONT MOUNTAIN BIKE ADVOCATE (VMBA) | $18,275 |
| NEW YORK SKI EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION | $8,000 |
| PATS PEAK EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION | $6,000 |
| CHINA PEAK RACE TEAM | $6,000 |
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 (FY19–19, $7k) land where the poverty rate runs at 22%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 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 +43% since the first grant, against +14% for the ones you funded once.
4 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 3 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, 81% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k 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
OREGON ADAPTIVE SPORTS4× · 2019–2024 · $57k · revenue +167%
VERMONT ADAPTIVE SKI AND SPORTS3× · 2019–2024 · $51k · revenue +37%- VMVERMONT MOUNTAIN BIKE ADVOCATES2× · 2023–2024 · $33k · revenue +43%
Funded once
- KPKillington Pico Ski Resortone grant, 2017 · $40k
- FOFriends of Therapeutic Recreationone grant, 2019 · $16k
- GOGlobal Opportunities Unlimited Incgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $15k · revenue +197%
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.
Adaptive Sports at Mount Snow is a volunteer-driven non-profit that provides adaptive sports, recreational opportunities and educational experiences to the Mount Snow community and its visitors throughout the year. Adaptive Sports at Mount…
The Organization is a competitive alpine sports club, fostering the development of alpine athletes of every age, with each athlete representing the highest level of sportsmanship, teamwork, leadership, and personal responsibility.
Big Sky Ski Education Foundation offers competitive Alpine, Freeride, and Nordic skiing programs.
Educate and train future ski racing champions. we help alpine ski racers achieve their racing potential through the highest level of physical conditioning, race training and professional coaching.
The organization's goal is to foster a healthy lifestyle through outdoor sports for individuals with disabilities in a fun, accessible, and inclusive environment.
Provide adaptive sports for the disabled.
Far West Skiing promotes participation and enthusiasm in alpine ski racing from entry level to elite level by encouraging and supporting Far West clubs, athletes, coaches and officials to become passionate lifelong skiers.
To provide education instruction to boys and girls in the sport of skiing, physical fitness, leadership and sportsmanship. formal skiing instruction is provided and students participate in skiing related races and events.
Under the auspices of united states ski and snowboard, nyssra fosters well developed programs and athletes by providing the structure, direction, resources and support required for athletes to reach their individual potential without…
None
To create programs that are athletically and educationally based, which will facilitate the development of vermont skiers into world-class medalists and life long enthusiasts of the sport.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Oregon Adaptive Sports and the most unlike its peers is Mount Mansfield Ski Educational Foundation Inc. 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 26 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 8% of your grantees by number, and just 19% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
27 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.
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 Craig Hospital Foundation ↗
- Who funds OREGON ADAPTIVE SPORTS ↗
- Who funds VERMONT ADAPTIVE SKI AND SPORTS ↗
- Who funds VERMONT MOUNTAIN BIKE ADVOCATES ↗
- Who funds Global Opportunities Unlimited Inc ↗
- Who funds Bay Area Outreach and Recreation Program ↗
- Who funds ALYESKA SKI CLUB INC ↗
- Who funds NEW YORK SKI EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds PACIFIC NORTHWEST SKI ASSN ↗
- Who funds PROCTOR ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds SPORTABLE RICHMOND ADAPTIVE SPORTS AND RECREATION INC ↗
- Who funds Steamboat Adaptive Recreational Sports ↗
- Who funds BLUEWOOD ALPINE RACE TEAM ↗
- Who funds ADAPTIVE SPORTS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds UTAH ATHLETIC FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PATS PEAK EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
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: Move United · Christopher Reeve Foundation · Lintilhac Foundation Inc · The Vermont Community Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc
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 Kelly S Brush Foundation Inc 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Vermont Adaptive Ski and Sports — 11% 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.