Skip to content
Expect Miracles Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Expect Miracles Foundation

EXPECT MIRACLES FOUNDATION rallies the financial services industry and byeond to invest in life-saving cancer research while advancing the financial and emotional health of people impacted by cancer.

$2.0M
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$1.0M
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$12MEducation$45k
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $1,500,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,988,409 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $488,409 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.
$1,000,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE$1,000,000
MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER$500,000
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 (FY18–19, $20k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%GRAHAMTASTIC CONNECTION: $10k → 9%GRAHAMTASTIC CONNECTION: $10k → 9%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

ME
VT
NY
MA
PA
CT
RI
CA
MD
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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$12M · 10 repeat orgs$127k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +11% since the first grant, against +11% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
14

Total granted

$12M
$127k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+11%
+11%

Still filing today

70%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
HealthEducationHuman ServicesPhilanthropyOther
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

  • DI
    DANA-FARBER INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $8.1M · revenue +218%
  • MEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER
    8× · 2017–2024 · $2.6M · revenue +121%
  • LL
    LUCY'S LOVE BUS CHARITABLE TRUST INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $30k · revenue +40%

Funded once

  • PS
    PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2019 · $18k
  • NP
    Nicholas Pedone Foundation
    one grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue -105%
  • RHODE ISLAND SCHOOL OF DESIGN
    one grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +11%
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
Dana-Farber Children's Hospital Cancer Care Inc

To oversee, coordinate and support the Pediatric Oncology Programs at Boston Children's Hospital and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Inc.

Health
2
Childrens Cancer Therapy Development Institute

To make all childhood cancers universally survivable by delivering new treatments to clinical trials through scientific discovery.

—
3
Children's Cancer Fund of Dallas inc

Children's cancer fund champions kids in their fight against cancer through strategic investments in research and care in north texas.

Health
4
Targeting Resistance in Cancer Cooperative
Health
5
Oncology Consultants Cancer Research Fun
Health
6
Samuel Waxman Cancer Research Foundation

The samuel waxman cancer research foundation (the "foundation") funds innovative research to bring faster cures to patients. in addition to supporting ongoing collaborative research in specific cancers, our scientists are investigating the…

—
7
Pano Koumantaros Cancer Research Fund Inc
Philanthropy
8
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
9
Fox Chase Cancer Center Foundation

To prevail over cancer, marshaling heart and mind in bold scientific discovery, pioneering prevention and compassionate care.

Health
10
The Don Monti Memorial Research Foundation Inc

The Foundation's mission - establish and maintain funding for research, education, fellowship and patient care relating to cancer.

—
11
Cancer Research Foundation

The cancer research foundation mission is to raise funds to fund both early-career cancer scientists and new directions in cancer science research with the goal of contributing to transformational events in the prevention, treatment and…

Health
12
The Adenoid Cystic Carcinoma Research Foundation

The adenoid cyctic carcinoma research foundation (accrf) supports research into adenoid cystic carcinoma that will accelerate the development of improved therapies and a cure for the disease.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Jonsson Cancer Center Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Ella's Army 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

19 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. 19 of the 24 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/19
Grantees still filing
11/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DANA-FARBER INC: $8,130,138 · OtherDANA-FARBER INCTHE SAMFUND INC: $646,312 · OtherTHE SAMFUND INC+9 more: $114,100 · OtherMEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER: $2,620,000 · HealthMEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING C…+5 more: $80,000 · HealthGrahamtastic Connection: $20,000 · Human ServicesPurple Songs Can Fly: $10,000 · Human ServicesRHODE ISLAND SCHOOL OF DESIGN: $10,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST FOUNDATION INC: $7,500 · EducationPresident and Fellows of Middlebury College: $6,000 · EducationARVF CORPORATION THE ALICIA ROSE VICTORIOUS FOUNDATION: $5,000 · EducationNicholas Pedone Foundation: $10,000 · Philanthropy
Other$8,890,550Health$2,700,000Human Services$30,000Education$28,500Philanthropy$10,000

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 budgetDANA-FARBER INC: $8,130,138 over 8y, 2.0% of budgetMEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER: $2,620,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SAMFUND INC: $646,312 over 2y, 37% of budgetLUCY'S LOVE BUS CHARITABLE TRUST INC: $30,000 over 3y, 2.7% of budgetZACHING AGAINST CANCER FOUNDATION INC: $23,600 over 3y, 3.1% of budgetGrahamtastic Connection: $20,000 over 2y, 4.6% of budgetTHE VIRGINIA THURSTON HEALING GARDEN INC: $17,000 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetMAGICAL MOON FOUNDATION INC: $14,000 over 2y, 5.1% of budgetFROM MADDIS CLOSET: $14,000 over 2y, 14% of budgetNicholas Pedone Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetRHODE ISLAND SCHOOL OF DESIGN: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWHEELOCK COLLEGE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPurple Songs Can Fly: $10,000 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST FOUNDATION INC: $7,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetARVF CORPORATION THE ALICIA ROSE VICTORIOUS FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 1.2% 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.

Network for GoodThe Bank of America C…Paypal Charitable Giv…Fidelity Investments …American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Network for GoodDC8.9× affinity7 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Network for Good · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Expect Miracles Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Expect Miracles Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 90%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • President and Fellows of Middlebury College: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
9get no government money at all
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 24 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 Expect Miracles’ 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