Skip to content
24 Foundation Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

24 Foundation Inc

24 foundation aims to inspire and engage communities to make an immediate impact on the lives of people affected by cancer.

$2.1M
Granted FY2024still arriving
13
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$473k
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 2024.

Health$3.1MHuman Services$200kEducation$106kHousing & Shelter$51kFood & Nutrition$25kPhilanthropy$10kReligion$5k
02FY2024 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 13 grants below total $669,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $2,072,809 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $1,403,809 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k11 grants · $189k
  • $250k+1 grant · $473k
$15,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$1.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Atrium Health Foundation$472,500
Claires Army$25,000
Pinky Swear$24,000
Hospitality House$20,000
Nothing Pink$20,000
Casting Carolinas$20,000
Go Jen Go$15,000
Isabella Santos Foundation$15,000
Move For Jenn$15,000
Feast For Good$15,000
Queens University$10,000
CLT Foundation$10,000
SECU Family House$7,500
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 (FY19–24, $201k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, 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%PINKY SWEAR FOUNDATION: $25k → 11%Casting Carolinas: $20k → 12%Pinky Swear: $24k → 11%CASTING CAROLINAS: $14k → 12%Pinky Swear: $24k → 11%Casting Carolinas: $12k → 12%Pinky Swear: $20k → 11%CASTING CAROLINAS: $9k → 12%PINKY SWEAR FOUNDATION: $20k → 11%Starr Nolan: $9k → 12%PINKY SWEAR FOUNDATION: $6k → 11%CASTING CAROLINAS: $8k → 12%INDIANA WOMEN IN NEED FOUNDATION: $12k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

MT
MN
IN
CA
MD
NC
SC
LA
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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.2M · 21 repeat orgs$274k to everyone else

21 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2024, 10 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
11

Total granted

$3.2M
$256k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+33%
+51%

Still filing today

90%
73%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $18k 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
HealthHuman ServicesEducationPhilanthropyReligionOther
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

  • AH
    ATRIUM HEALTH FOUNDATION
    5× · 2017–2024 · $1.7M · revenue +195%
  • CA
    Claire's Army Inc
    7× · 2018–2024 · $166k · revenue +116%
  • GJ
    Go Jen Go Foundation Inc
    8× · 2017–2024 · $138k · revenue +247%

Funded once

  • L
    LIVESTRONG
    one grant, 2017 · $100k
  • Indiana University Foundationgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $55k · revenue +97%
  • CC
    CURE CHASERS CYCLING INC
    one grant, 2020 · $35k
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
Foundation for Women's Cancer

To support and empower all affected by gynecologic cancers through education, research, and public awareness.

Health
2
Pretty in Pink Foundation Inc
Philanthropy
3
Pink It Forward
Health
4
Breast Cancer Angels

Provide immediate direct financial and emotional support to patients undergoing breast cancer treatment.

Health
5
The Breast Cancer Research Foundation Inc

The mission of the breast cancer research foundation, inc. is to prevent and cure breast cancer by advancing the world's most promising research.

Public Safety & Disaster
6
Inflammatory Breast Cancer International Consortium

To engage, educate and collaborate worldwide to bring about breakthroughs that will save lives from the toughest breast cancer: inflammatory breast cancer.

Health
7
Play for Pink Inc

To support research related to the causes, cures, and prevention of breast cancer.

Crime & Legal
8
Cancer Research and Life Foundation

The organization supports development of novel and compassionate therapies and treatment for the poor, the needy, the hopeless and the forgotten stricken with the deadly disease of cancer.

Health
9
Wyoming Foundation for Cancer Care Inc

To reduce the impact of cancer on wyoming residents diagnosed with cancer by providing non-medical, charitable financial assistance and by providing free education and screening opportunities to residents not diagnosed with cancer.

Human Services
10
South Carolina Ovarian Cancer Foundation

The south carolina ovarian cancer foundation (scocf) was created as an organization to support women diagnosed with ovarian cancer, to be a source of education and awareness about the disease to people across the state, and to support…

Health
11
Breast Cancer Research Foundation of Ala

To help find a cure for breast cancer by funding promising breast cancer research in alabama and to raise community awareness and funding for that research.

Health
12
Pink Revolution Breast Cancer Alliance of Nh Corp

We are a coalition of compassionate individuals united in our commitment to improve the treatment journey for cancer patients facing all types of cancer. through financial support initiatives, we alleviate the financial strain often…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Little Red Door Cancer Agency Inc; the most unlike its peers is ChemoCars 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

27 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. 27 of the 34 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
27/27
Grantees still filing
19/27
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ATRIUM HEALTH FOUNDATION: $1,722,500 · HealthATRIUM HEALTH FOUNDATIONGo Jen Go Foundation Inc: $137,750 · HealthGo Jen Go Foundation IncHOSPITALITY HOUSE OF CHARLOTTE: $123,000 · Health+12 more: $401,800 · Health+12 moreClaire's Army Inc: $165,500 · Human ServicesClaire's Arm…PINKY SWEAR FOUNDATION: $118,750 · Human ServicesPINKY SWEAR …Casting Carolinas Inc: $70,000 · Human ServicesCasting Caro…INDIANA WOMEN IN NEED FOUNDATION INC: $24,000 · Human ServicesINDIANA WOME…ALLIANCE OF DIVINE LOVE INC: $156,500 · OtherALLIANCE OF …LIVESTRONG: $100,000 · OtherLIVESTRONGBASE CAMP CHILDREN'S CANCER FOUNDATION INC: $36,000 · OtherBASE CAMP CH…CURE CHASERS CYCLING INC: $35,115 · OtherCURE CHASERS…FEAST FOR GOOD: $25,000 · OtherFEAST FOR GO…+3 more: $21,000 · Other+3 moreQueens University of Charlotte: $136,250 · EducationIndiana University Foundation: $55,000 · EducationJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $17,500 · EducationThe Livestrong Foundation: $100,000 · PhilanthropyFRANCISCAN HEALTH FOUNDATION INC: $58,200 · PhilanthropyLSU HEALTH SCIENCES FOUNDATION IN SHREVEPORT: $10,000 · PhilanthropyCAMP WATCHA WANNA DO LTD: $5,000 · Religion
Health$2,385,050Human Services$378,250Other$373,615Education$208,750Philanthropy$168,200Religion$5,000

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 budgetATRIUM HEALTH FOUNDATION: $1,722,500 over 5y, 0.7% of budgetClaire's Army Inc: $165,500 over 7y, 7.7% of budgetGo Jen Go Foundation Inc: $137,750 over 8y, 11% of budgetQueens University of Charlotte: $136,250 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetHOSPITALITY HOUSE OF CHARLOTTE: $123,000 over 8y, 2.1% of budgetPINKY SWEAR FOUNDATION: $118,750 over 6y, 0.8% of budgetThe Livestrong Foundation: $100,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetCasting Carolinas Inc: $70,000 over 6y, 27% of budgetCASTING FOR RECOVERY: $68,000 over 4y, 1.8% of budgetULMAN FOUNDATION INC: $62,500 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetIndiana University Health Foundation Inc: $61,800 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetFRANCISCAN HEALTH FOUNDATION INC: $58,200 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetIndiana University Foundation: $55,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCarolina Breast Friends Inc: $50,000 over 4y, 2.5% of budgetNOTHING PINK INC: $42,000 over 3y, 7.4% of budgetBASE CAMP CHILDREN'S CANCER FOUNDATION INC: $36,000 over 3y, 2.2% of budgetChemoCars Inc: $35,000 over 3y, 8.7% of budgetThe Isabella Santos Foundation: $27,500 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetMOVE FOR JENN FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 2y, 8.6% of budgetJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $17,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCANCER FOR COLLEGE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetLSU HEALTH SCIENCES FOUNDATION IN SHREVEPORT: $10,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetLITTLE RED DOOR CANCER AGENCY INC: $8,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetPINK RIBBON CONNECTION: $6,000 over 2y, 3.9% 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.

Duke Energy FoundationThe Presbyterian Hosp…Foundation for the Ca…Indiana Breast Cancer…Albemarle FoundationThe Pfizer Foundation…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…Synchrony FoundationThe Blackbaud Giving …The Bank of America C…Enterprise Holdings F…Natl Christian Charit…
Duke Energy FoundationNC16.1× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Duke Energy Foundation · The Presbyterian Hospital · Foundation for the Carolinas · Indiana Breast Cancer Awareness Trust · Albemarle Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Synchrony Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Enterprise Holdings Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc

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 24 Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from 24 Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →median 12%
  • Johns Hopkins University: 12% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
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 34 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 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 24’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