· Public charity
American Federation for Aging Research Inc
The american federation for aging research (afar) is a national organization whose mission is to support and advance healthy aging through biomedical research.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 52% of AMERICAN FEDERATION FOR AGING RESEARCH INC’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k1 grant · $8k
- $10k–50k13 grants · $253k
- $50k–250k22 grants · $2.4M
- $250k+21 grants · $10M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY | $905,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO | $776,450 |
| BOSTON UNIVERSITY | $757,500 |
| UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA | $750,000 |
| PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY | $750,000 |
| MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY | $525,000 |
| UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER | $450,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE | $428,978 |
| YALE UNIVERSITY | $414,453 |
| BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE | $380,000 |
| BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL INC | $375,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA | $375,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA | $375,000 |
| WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY | $375,000 |
| NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY | $375,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 81% of your 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 +49% since the first grant, against +17% for the ones you funded once.
61 repeat relationships — 36 still active in FY2024, 25 since wound down; 14 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; $2.1M 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
- AEAlbert Einstein College of Medicine5× · 2020–2024 · $1.4M · revenue +293%
- TRTHE ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY4× · 2017–2024 · $1.3M · revenue +33%
JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY6× · 2018–2024 · $1.2M · revenue +51%
Funded once
ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAIone grant, 2023 · $741k · revenue +8%- NNIHNIAone grant, 2023 · $375k
- UOUniversity of Kentucky Research Foundationone grant, 2022 · $375k · revenue +11%
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.
We educate the next generation of leaders to improve the health of our society.
See Form 990, Part I, Line 1, Description of Organization Mission.
As a leading research university with a distinctive commitment to undergraduate education, Rice University aspires to path breaking research, unsurpassed teaching, and contributions to the betterment of our world. It seeks to fulfill this…
Dartmouth College educates the most promising students and prepares them for a lifetime of learning and of responsible leadership, through a faculty dedicated to teaching and the creation of knowledge.
The graduate school of the stowers institute for medical research ("gssimr") exempt purpose is to provide graduate education that will prepare scholars for scientific research in the biological sciences.
The institute for advanced study (the institute) is one of the world's leading centers for theoretical research and intellectual inquiry. see schedule o.
Fred hutch cancer center ("fred hutch") unites innovative research and compassionate care to prevent and eliminate cancer and infectious disease. continued on schedule o
Please see schedule o
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.
Case Western Reserve University is an independent, research-oriented university with broadly based strengths in health, including medicine, nursing and dentistry; in engineering; in the arts and sciences; and in law, management and social…
The mission of the institute has remained constant since its founding in 1953. as its restated articles of incorporation state the primary purpose and objective of the howard hughes medical institute shall be the promotion of human…
The mission of Rush is to improve the health of the individuals and diverse communities we serve through the integration of outstanding patient care, education, research and community partnerships.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Trustees of Boston University and the most unlike its peers is Orentreich Foundation for the Advancement of Science 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 62 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) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% 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.
67 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. 67 of the 121 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 Yale University ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗
- Who funds Albert Einstein College of Medicine ↗
- Who funds THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds THE ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds MAYO CLINIC ↗
- Who funds Massachusetts Institute of Technology ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH ↗
- Who funds BUCK INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH ON AGING ↗
- Who funds Northwestern University ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF BOSTON COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI ↗
- Who funds Vanderbilt University ↗
- Who funds Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation ↗
- Who funds WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES ↗
- Who funds Baylor College of Medicine ↗
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: The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York · Mayo Clinic · Washington University · Yale University · Johns Hopkins University · American Cancer Society Inc · Alzheimer's Disease & Related Disorders Association Inc · Cystic Fibrosis Foundation · American Heart Association Inc · University of Pittsburgh · Brightfocus Foundation · Howard Hughes Medical Institute
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 American Federation for Aging Research 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Joslin Diabetes Center Inc — 35% of income from government
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology — 35% of income from government
- Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation — 31% of income from government
- Marine Biological Laboratory — 20% of income from government
- Society for Muscle Biology Inc — 17% of income from government
- Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology — 14% of income from government
- Trustees of Tufts College — 13% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston University — 12% of income from government
- Johns Hopkins University — 12% of income from government
- Yale University — 12% of income from government
- Children's Hospital Corporation — 10% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- Northeastern University — 7% of income from government
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — 7% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston College — 3% 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.