Skip to content

· Private foundation

E C Fuller Trust U Art 16 Main

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$775k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$175k
Largest
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 2025.

Health$4.0MScience & Tech$790kRecreation & Sports$114k
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $74k
  • $50k–250k7 grants · $696k
$75,000
Median grant
8
States reached
$9.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY$175,000
UNIV OF TEXAS SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTE$121,000
KECK GRADUATE INSTITUTE$100,000
CANCER CARE INC$100,000
METHODIST HOSPITAL$75,000
CHILDRENS HOSPITAL LOS ANGELES$75,000
GLOBAL RESOURCE FOR ADVANCING CANCER EDU$50,000
KIDNEY CANCER ASSOCIATION$37,500
NATIONAL COALITION FOR CANCER SURVIVORSH$36,500
THE GET IN TOUCH FOUNDATION$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.

US giving: 87% of grant dollars ($4.3M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 13% that went abroad ($622k) is mapped below.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 61% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE: $167k → 16%ECOLE POLYTECHNIQUE FEDERALE DE: $412k → 8%BUCK INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH ON AGING: $150k → 8%CHILDRENS HOSPITAL LOS ANGELES: $75k → 14%GILDAS CLUB WESTCHESTER INC: $75k → 9%CANCER RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $100k → 17%UNIV OF TEXAS SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTE: $121k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON: $115k → 16%OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE: $114k → 12%THE GET IN TOUCH FOUNDATION: $5k → 12%AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $242k → 8%AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $230k → 13%METHODIST HOSPITAL: $75k → 16%GLOBAL RESOURCE FOR ADVANCING CANCER EDU: $50k → 9%NATIONAL COALITION FOR CANCER SURVIVORSH: $37k → 8%DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE: $150k → 16%BUCK INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH ON AGING: $150k → 8%CHILDRENS HOSPITAL LOS ANGELES: $75k → 14%GILDA'S CLUB WESTCHESTER: $71k → 9%CANCER CARE INC: $100k → 17%KIDNEY CANCER ASSOCIATION: $38k → 16%OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE: $100k → 12%AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $175k → 8%DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE: $150k → 16%KECK GRADUATE INSTITUTE: $100k → 14%CANCER CARE INC: $100k → 17%OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIV: $130k → 12%CANCER CARE INC: $83k → 17%MEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING: $130k → 17%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

WA
NY
MA
OR
IN
CT
CA
MD
GA
TX

Beyond the US: 13% of all-years giving ($622k)

1 country, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
Switzerland$622k · 4 grants
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.7M · 10 repeat orgs$1.2M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +14% since the first grant, against +10% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
6

Total granted

$3.7M
$755k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+14%
+10%

Still filing today

60%
17%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 45% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $425k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’21’22’23’24’25
HealthSocial ScienceEducationOther
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

  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc
    3× · 2017–2024 · $467k · revenue +162%
  • BI
    BUCK INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH ON AGING
    2× · 2023–2024 · $300k · revenue +14%
  • CC
    Cancer Care Inc
    3× · 2023–2025 · $283k · revenue +17%

Funded once

  • EP
    ECOLE POLYTECHNIQUE FEDERALE DE LAUSANNE
    one grant, 2023 · $150k
  • MS
    MEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING
    one grant, 2017 · $130k
  • OH
    OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIV
    one grant, 2017 · $130k
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
Targeting Resistance in Cancer Cooperative
Health
2
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.

Health
3
Cancer Research and Biostatistics

To help conquer cancer and other diseases through the application of biostatistical principles and innovative data management methods.

Health
4
Addario Lung Cancer Medical Institute

The Addario Lung Cancer Medical Institute ALCMI is dedicated to catalyzing and accelerating the discovery, development and delivery of new and more effective treatment options for lung cancer patients.

Health
5
Commonwealth Cancer Consortium Inc

Break through cancer is a foundation dedicated to supporting translational research in the most difficult to treat cancers. our partner organizations are among the top cancer research centers and together, represent some of the most…

—
6
Pano Koumantaros Cancer Research Fund Inc
Philanthropy
7
Curesearch for Children's Cancer

Curesearch's mission is to fund & support targeted & innovative cancer research with measurable results, & to be the authoritative source of information & resources for all those affected by children's cancer. see schedule o for…

Health
8
The Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Fdn Group

Susan g. komen 's mission is to save lives by meeting the most critical needs in our communities & investing in breakthrough research to prevent & cure breast cancer.

—
9
The Translational Genomics Research Institute

Please see schedule o

Health
10
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

Fred hutch cancer center ("fred hutch") unites innovative research and compassionate care to prevent and eliminate cancer and infectious disease. continued on schedule o

Health
11
Northwell Health Cancer Institute Inc

Northwell health cancer institute is part of northwell health, inc. ("northwell"), which strives to improve the health of the communities it serves and is committed to providing the highest quality clinical care; educating the current and…

Health
12
Quantum Leap Healthcare Collaborative

The mission of quantum leap healthcare collarborative is to provide management and financial support to healthcare research organizations, particularly involving breast cancer research and treatment.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Cancer Care Inc; the most unlike its peers is Dana-Farber Cancer Institute 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

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 23 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
7/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ECOLE POLYTECHNIQUE FEDERALE DE: $640,000 · OtherECOLE POLYTECHNIQUE FEDERALE DEMEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER: $610,000 · OtherMEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCERUNIVERSITY OF LAUSANNE: $244,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF LAUSANNEOREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE: $214,000 · OtherOREGON HEALTH & SCIENCEECOLE POLYTECHNIQUE FEDERALE DE LAUSANNE: $150,000 · OtherECOLE POLYTECHNIQUE FEDERALE DE LAUSANNEMEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING: $130,000 · OtherOREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIV: $130,000 · OtherTHE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS BD ANDERSON: $130,000 · OtherUNIV OF TEXAS SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTE: $121,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON: $115,000 · Other+2 more: $125,000 · OtherAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $646,500 · HealthAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INCDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: $467,466 · HealthDana-Farber Cancer Institute IncCancer Care Inc: $283,000 · HealthCancer Care IncChildren's Hospital Los Angeles: $150,000 · HealthChildren's Hospital Los AngelesCANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY GREATER NY & CT INC: $145,500 · HealthCANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY GREATER NY & CT IN…CANCER RESEARCH INSTITUTE INC: $100,000 · HealthCANCER RESEARCH INSTITUTE INC+3 more: $79,000 · HealthBUCK INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH ON AGING: $300,000 · Social ScienceKeck Graduate Institute of Applied Life Sciences: $100,000 · Education
Other$2,609,000Health$1,871,466Social Science$300,000Education$100,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $646,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: $467,466 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetBUCK INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH ON AGING: $300,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetCancer Care Inc: $283,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetChildren's Hospital Los Angeles: $150,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY GREATER NY & CT INC: $145,500 over 2y, 8.5% of budgetCANCER RESEARCH INSTITUTE INC: $100,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetKeck Graduate Institute of Applied Life Sciences: $100,000 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.

  • Who funds AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc ↗
  • Who funds BUCK INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH ON AGING ↗
  • Who funds Cancer Care Inc ↗
  • Who funds Children's Hospital Los Angeles ↗
  • Who funds CANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY GREATER NY & CT INC ↗
  • Who funds CANCER RESEARCH INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds Keck Graduate Institute of Applied Life Sciences ↗
  • Who funds THE KIDNEY CANCER ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL COALITION FOR CANCER SURVIVORSHIP ↗
  • Who funds THE GET IN TOUCH FOUNDATIONINC ↗

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.

National Philanthropic TrustPA10.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · 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 E C Fuller Trust U Art 16 Main funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from E C Fuller Trust U Art 16 Main. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: 7% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to E C Fuller Trust U Art 16 Main?

Find your warmest path to E C Fuller Trust U Art 16 Main 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 23 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on E C Fuller Trust U Art 16 Main’s filings →

More from the funding graph