Skip to content
Breast Cancer Fund of Ohio at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Breast Cancer Fund of Ohio

The BREAST CANCER FUND OF OHIO supports organizations throughout ohio that help women and men who are coping with the day-to-day challenges of living while being treated for breast cancer.

$164k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$17k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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$262kPublic Safety & Disaster$168kHuman Services$91kFood & Nutrition$52k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 7 grants below total $64,500, the rows itemized in this filing. The $163,785 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $99,285 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $36k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $29k
$7,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$144k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PINK RIBBON GOOD$17,000
CANCER FAMILY CARE$12,000
ATRIUM MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION$7,500
VICTORY CENTER IN TOLEDO$7,000
CANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY OF CENTRAL$7,000
LIFE CARE ALLIANCE$7,000
CANCER SUPPORT COMM OF GREATER CINC$7,000
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 (FY17–25, $56k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 14%CANCER SUPPORT COMM OF GREATER CINC: $8k → 16%CANCER SUPPORT COMM OF GREATER CINC: $7k → 16%CANCER SUPPORT COMM OF GREATER CINC: $7k → 16%CANCER SUPPORT COMM OF GREATER CINC: $7k → 16%CANCER SUPPORT COMM OF GREATER CINC: $7k → 16%CANCER SUPPORT COMM OF GREATER CINC: $7k → 16%CANCER SUPPORT COMM OF GREATER CINC: $7k → 16%CANCER SUPPORT COMM OF GREATER CINC: $7k → 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.
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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$574k · 11 repeat orgs$64k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +62% since the first grant, against +29% for those funded once.

11 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
9

Total granted

$574k
$64k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+62%
+29%

Still filing today

91%
89%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthFood & NutritionHuman ServicesPhilanthropyReligionOther
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

  • PR
    PINK RIBBON GOOD INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $123k · revenue +438%
  • CF
    Cancer Family Care Inc
    7× · 2017–2025 · $72k · revenue +22%
  • LA
    LIFECARE ALLIANCE
    9× · 2017–2025 · $59k · revenue +81%

Funded once

  • CC
    CLEVELAND CLINIC TAUSSIG CANCER CTR
    one grant, 2017 · $8k
  • RC
    ROSS COUNTY COMMUNITY ACTION COMMISSIONgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $8k · revenue +78%
  • BS
    Bon Secours Mercy Health Foundationgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $8k · revenue +38%
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
Columbus Community Clinical Oncology Program

Our mission is to deliver state-of-the-art cancer care to patients in their communities through clinical trials. this allows individuals to remain in their won neighborhoods, while receiving the latest and best in cancer screenings,…

—
2
Thompson Cancer Survival Center

Thompson Cancer Survival Center provides support services for cancer patients, in alignment with Covenant Health's mission to serve the community by improving the quality of life through better health, regardless of a patient's ability to…

—
3
Community Cancer Foundation

To assist, encourage, promote, and advance the best care, treatment, and rehabilitation of persons afflicted with cancer or related medical conditions.

Health
4
Cancer Support Community of Greater Ann Arbor

CSC uplifts and strengthens people impacted by cancer by providing support, fostering compassionate communities, and breaking down barriers to care.

—
5
St Vincent Hospital of the Hospital Sisters of the Third Order of St Franci s

To continue christ's healing love through delivery of competent & compassionate healthcare in an environment sensitive to the needs of all people. the hospital is committed to providing a broad range of quality inpatient and outpatient…

Health
6
Dayton Clinical Oncology Program Inc

To reduce cancer incidence and mortality through improved treatment and prevention by offering national, state-of-the-art cancer research to local communities.

Health
7
Trinity Health System Group

As an affiliate of commonspirit health, we make the healing presence of god known in our world by improving the health of the people we serve, especially those who are vulnerable, while we advance social justice for all.

—
8
Cumberland Medical Center

Cumberland Medical Center provides quality healthcare, in alignment with Covenant Health's mission to serve the community by improving the quality of life through better health, regardless of the patient's ability to pay.

Health
9
University Medical Center Inc

To provide care to our community and to serve as a major teaching hospital for education and training in medicine, dentistry, nursing, and allied health professions.

Health
10
Trihealth Physician Institute

Provides the community necessary medical care through specialty physicians.

Health
11
The Cleveland Clinic Foundation Group Return

Caring for life, researching for health and educating those who serve.

Health
12
Cancer Care Services

Cancer care services supports cancer patients, cares for caregivers, and empowers survivors to reduce the impact of cancer in tarrant county.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Cancer Support Community - Greater Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky; the most unlike its peers is Jd Breast Cancer 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

18 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. 18 of the 20 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/18
Grantees still filing
15/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PINK RIBBON GOOD INC: $123,000 · HealthPINK RIBBON GOOD INCCancer Family Care Inc: $72,000 · HealthCancer Family Care IncATRIUM MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $44,500 · HealthATRIUM MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATIONCANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY CENTRAL OHIO: $42,500 · HealthCANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY CENTRAL OHIOTHE CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION: $25,365 · HealthTHE CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION+5 more: $33,250 · Health+5 moreUNIVERSITY HOSPITALS HEALTH SYSTEM INC: $67,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY HOSPITALS HEALT…THE VICTORY CENTER: $49,000 · OtherTHE VICTORY CENTERGOOD SAMARITAN FOUNDATION - DAYTON: $12,500 · OtherGOOD SAMARITAN FOUNDATION …CLEVELAND CLINIC TAUSSIG CANCER CTR: $8,000 · OtherROSS COUNTY COMMUNITY ACTION COMMISSION: $8,000 · OtherCANCER PATIENT SERVICES: $7,000 · OtherLIFECARE ALLIANCE: $59,000 · Food & NutritionLIFECARE A…CANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY - GREATER CINCINNATI/NORTHERN KENTUCKY: $56,000 · Human ServicesCANCER SU…KAREN P NAKON BREAST CANCER FOUND: $23,500 · PhilanthropyBon Secours Mercy Health Foundation: $7,500 · Religion
Health$340,615Other$151,500Food & Nutrition$59,000Human Services$56,000Philanthropy$23,500Religion$7,500

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 budgetPINK RIBBON GOOD INC: $123,000 over 9y, 0.7% of budgetCancer Family Care Inc: $72,000 over 7y, 1.0% of budgetLIFECARE ALLIANCE: $59,000 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetCANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY - GREATER CINCINNATI/NORTHERN KENTUCKY: $56,000 over 8y, 1.1% of budgetTHE VICTORY CENTER: $49,000 over 7y, 1.8% of budgetATRIUM MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $44,500 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetCANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY CENTRAL OHIO: $42,500 over 6y, 0.8% of budgetTHE CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION: $25,365 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetKAREN P NAKON BREAST CANCER FOUND: $23,500 over 3y, 7.1% of budgetGOOD SAMARITAN FOUNDATION - DAYTON: $12,500 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetROSS COUNTY COMMUNITY ACTION COMMISSION: $8,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetBon Secours Mercy Health Foundation: $7,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJD BREAST CANCER FOUNDATION: $7,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetTHE METROHEALTH FOUNDATION INC: $7,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCANCER PATIENT SERVICES: $7,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetSOUTHERN OHIO MEDICAL CENTER: $7,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetADENA HEALTH SYSTEM: $5,250 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

Johnson Charitable Gi…American Endowment Fo…Morgan Stanley Global…The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Johnson Charitable Gift FundOH13.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Johnson Charitable Gift Fund · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Breast Cancer Fund of Ohio funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Breast Cancer Fund of Ohio. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Breast Cancer Fund of Ohio?

    Find your warmest path to Breast Cancer Fund of Ohio 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.

    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 20 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Breast Cancer Fund of Ohio’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