Skip to content
Fcancer at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Fcancer

FCANCER IS dedicated to advancing health equity through early detection and prevention programs, and by providing resources to navigate, manage, and cope with cancer.

$470k
Granted FY2024still arriving
11
Grants FY2024still arriving
7
States reached
$75k
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, FY2018 to 2024.

Health$1.6MFood & Nutrition$110k
02FY2024 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $162k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $294k
$42,500
Median grant
7
States reached
$1.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Oaklahoma Community Health Services$75,000
project angel food$60,000
Conquer Cancer - the ASCO Foundation$57,500
THE Institute for Family Health$51,216
VENICE FAMILY CLINIC$50,000
LA Trust for Childrens Health$42,500
San Carlos Apache Healthcare Corporation$39,927
RiverStone Health$36,607
ChemoCars$25,000
Patient Advocate Foundation$18,148
Cancer Support Community - Los Angeles$7,700
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 (FY23–24, $60k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%RiverStone Health: $37k → 9%RiverStone Health: $23k → 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.
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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.7M · 11 repeat orgs$39k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +11% since the first grant, against -46% for those funded once.

11 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
1

Total granted

$1.7M
$39k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+11%
-46%

Still filing today

91%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthEducationHuman ServicesOther
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

  • TI
    THE INSTITUTE FOR FAMILY HEALTH
    6× · 2018–2024 · $441k · revenue +11%
  • PA
    PROJECT ANGEL FOOD
    4× · 2020–2024 · $235k · revenue +106%
  • SH
    STUDENT HEALTH SERVICES SUPPORT FUND INC dba The LA Trust
    7× · 2018–2024 · $194k · revenue +87%

Funded once

  • SC
    Southside Coalition of Community Health Centers
    one grant, 2020 · $39k · revenue -46%
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
Asian Pacific Health Care Venture Inc

Asian Pacific Health Care Venture, Inc. is a family of community health centers whose mission is to be the medical home for our patients by providing personalized, quality health care services in a culturally accessible manner.

—
2
San Fernando Community Hospital

Provides primary care, oral health, and behavioral health care, including health education to the community without regard to the ability to pay for services.

Health
3
Los Angeles Christian Health Centers

The mission of los angeles christian health centers is to follow christ by loving and serving our neighbors through the provision of comprehensive quality healthcare. our vision is the healing and restoration of homeless and underserved…

Health
4
All Inclusive Community Health Cent

The organization provides health care and other related services to medically underserved populations in Los Angeles County.

Health
5
South Central Family Health Center

To improve the quality of life for the diverse communities we serve providing affordable and comprehensive healthcare and education in a welcoming multi-cultural environment.

Health
6
Vista Community Clinic

The mission of Vista Community Clinic is to advance community health and hope by providing access to premier health services and education for those who need it most.

Health
7
Children's Hospital Los Angeles

Promotion and advancement of children's health through patient care, research, and education.

Health
8
Gracelight Community Health

Gracelight Community Health's mission is to provide quality primary healthcare that is accessible to any patient in need in the communities it serves, regardless of ability to pay.

—
9
California Healthcare Foundation

Chcf is dedicated to advancing meaningful, measurable improvements in the way the health care delivery system provides care to the people of california, particularly those with low incomes and those whose needs are not well served by the…

—
10
Community Medical Centers Inc

The organization provides primary medical, behavior health, and dental care to the population of san joaquin, and solano counties without regard to patients' ability to pay.

Health
11
Via Care Community Health Center

Providing health care services to the poor and underserved of los angeles.

Health
12
Equity Health

Our mission is to ensure health care access to quality comprehensive health care services for persons who are medically needy or medically under-served and have traditionally experienced difficulty in getting care from traditional sources.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Cancer Support Community Los Angeles; 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

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 12 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)
1
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

THE INSTITUTE FOR FAMILY HEALTH: $441,316 · HealthTHE INSTITUTE FOR FAMILY HEALTHPROJECT ANGEL FOOD: $235,000 · HealthPROJECT ANGEL FOODVENICE FAMILY CLINIC: $187,479 · HealthVENICE FAMILY CLINICCOMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS INC: $170,000 · HealthCOMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS INCCONQUER CANCER FOUNDATION OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY: $115,000 · HealthCONQUER CANCER FOUNDATION OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGYChemoCars Inc: $50,000 · Health+1 more: $38,979 · HealthSTUDENT HEALTH SERVICES SUPPORT FUND INC dba The LA Trust: $194,133 · OtherSTUDENT HEALTH SER…San Carlos Apache Healthcare Corporation: $59,854 · OtherSan Carlos Apache …CANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY LOS ANGELES: $23,100 · OtherCANCER SUPPORT COM…PATIENT ADVOCATE FOUNDATION: $132,377 · EducationRiverStone Health Foundation: $59,912 · Human Services
Health$1,237,774Other$277,087Education$132,377Human Services$59,912

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE INSTITUTE FOR FAMILY HEALTH: $441,316 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetPROJECT ANGEL FOOD: $235,000 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetSTUDENT HEALTH SERVICES SUPPORT FUND INC dba The LA Trust: $194,133 over 7y, 1.9% of budgetVENICE FAMILY CLINIC: $187,479 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetCOMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS INC: $170,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetPATIENT ADVOCATE FOUNDATION: $132,377 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCONQUER CANCER FOUNDATION OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY: $115,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetRiverStone Health Foundation: $59,912 over 2y, 3.6% of budgetChemoCars Inc: $50,000 over 2y, 22% of budgetSouthside Coalition of Community Health Centers: $38,979 over 1y, 4.2% of budgetCANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY LOS ANGELES: $23,100 over 3y, 0.7% 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.

Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA4.6× affinity6 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Fcancer funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Fcancer. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 Fcancer?

    Find your warmest path to Fcancer 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 12 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 Fcancer’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