Skip to content
Plinth

· Community foundation

Foundation for Sarcoidosis Research

The FOUNDATION FOR SARCOIDOSIS RESEARCH (fsr) is the leading international organization dedicated to finding a cure for sarcoidosis and improving care for sarcoidosis patients through research, education, and support.

$952k
Granted FY2024still arriving
12
Grants FY2024still arriving
10
States reached
$200k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172024.

Health$1.3MEducation$1.2MScience & Tech$833kRecreation & Sports$85k
02FY2024 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 12 grants below total $838,461 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $952,335 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $113,874 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $9k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $66k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $764k
$50,500
Median grant
10
States reached
$17M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA$200,000
UNIVERSITY OF IOWA$163,400
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO$150,000
DUKE UNIVERSITY$100,000
UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO$100,000
MAYO CLINIC$50,500
CLEVELAND CLINIC$16,450
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY$15,450
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO$12,500
AMERICAN THORACIC SOCIETY (ATS)$10,611
NATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH$10,550
MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA$9,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 90% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%UPLIFTING ATHLETES: $10k → 6%UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $200k → 22%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO: $150k → 9%ALBANY MEDICAL COLLEGE: $20k → 14%AMERICAN THORACIC SOCIETY (ATS): $33k → 17%OKLAHOMA MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $125k → 16%MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA: $20k → 12%UNIVERSITY OF IOWA: $163k → 15%DUKE UNIVERSITY: $100k → 11%UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO: $100k → 10%NATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH: $250k → 12%THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY WEXNER MEDICAL CENTER: $150k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI: $30k → 16%CLEVELAND CLINIC: $29k → 17%UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON: $20k → 9%NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY: $30k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS: $20k → 19%JOHN HOPKINS MEDICAL CENTER: $50k → 19%UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $20k → 22%ATS FOUNDATION: $21k → 17%OKLAHOMA MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $25k → 16%UNIVERSITY OF IOWA: $90k → 15%DUKE UNIVERSITY: $50k → 11%NATIONAL JEWISH HOSPITAL: $150k → 12%OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $75k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI: $20k → 16%CLEVELAND CLINIC: $21k → 17%NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY: $20k → 14%JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $150k → 19%THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY: $25k → 22%ATS FOUNDATION: $20k → 17%UNIVERSITY OF IOWA: $30k → 15%NATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH: $20k → 12%UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI: $18k → 16%CLEVELAND CLINIC: $18k → 17%NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY: $15k → 14%JOHN HOPKINS MEDICAL CENTER: $25k → 19%AMERICAN THORACIC SOCIETY: $14k → 17%NATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH: $17k → 12%CLEVELAND CLINIC: $13k → 17%NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY: $15k → 14%AMERICAN THORACIC SOCIETY (ATS): $11k → 17%NATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH: $11k → 12%NATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH: $11k → 12%UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS CHICAGO: $150k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER: $25k → 12%AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION: $40k → 14%AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION: $24k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

WA
MN
IL
NY
IA
OH
PA
CT
CA
CO
MD
NC
SC
OK
TX

Grants abroad, by region — $105k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$105k · 100% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: FSR PILOT GRANT AWARED

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

73%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$2.0M · 15 repeat orgs$751k to everyone else

15 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
10

Total granted

$2.0M
$492k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+26%
+65%

Still filing today

60%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 56% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $259k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’19’20’21’22’23’24
EducationHealthRecreation & SportsOther

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

  • NATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH
    5× · 2019–2024 · $459k · revenue +26%
  • JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
    4× · 2019–2023 · $225k · revenue +25%
  • DUKE UNIVERSITY
    2× · 2023–2024 · $150k · revenue +27%

Funded once

  • University of Chicago
    one grant, 2023 · $150k · revenue +21%
  • Vanderbilt Universitygraduated
    3× · 2018–2020 · $150k · revenue +65%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL
    one grant, 2021 · $53k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
New York University

Nyu is a private university with approximately 60,000 matriculating students in 20 schools and institutes. nyu's primary missions are education, research and scholarship, and patient care.

Education
2
University of Miami

See Form 990, Part I, Line 1, Description of Organization Mission.

Education
3
Rush University Medical Center

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.

Health
4
University of Minnesota Physicians

University of minnesota physicians serves as the integrated group practice for the university of minnesota medical school full-time faculty to provide the highest quality healthcare to patients and their families.university of minnesota…

Health
5
Washington University

The washington university is a co-educational, nondenominational university with a long and distinguished history of teaching, research and (cont'd on schedule o)

Education
6
University of Southern California

The central mission of the university of southern california is the development of human beings and society as a whole through the cultivation and enrichment of the human mind and spirit. the principal means by which our mission is…

Education
7
Drexel University

Drexel university fulfills its founder's vision of preparing each new generation of students for productive professional and civic lives while also focusing its collective expertise on solving society's greatest problems. drexel is an…

Education
8
William Marsh Rice University

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…

Education
9
Truman Medical Center Incorporated

University health is an academic health center providing accessible, state-of-the-art quality healthcare to our community regardless of the ability to pay.

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
The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University

Stanford university is one of a select group of american universities that have achieved eminence in both undergraduate and graduate education and research - cont'd sch o.

Education
12
Cornell University

Education, research, medical services and other public services.

Education

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of Chicago and the most unlike its peers is American Lung Association. 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyFaith-Based Liberal Arts Co…Youth Sports ProgramsHealth Access Advocacy and …Cancer Support ServicesCommunity Foundations
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 75 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%5%<5yr14%0%5–10yr19%14%10–20yr16%18%20–35yr13%5%35–55yr16%59%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%0%<5yr14%0%5–10yr19%12%10–20yr16%10%20–35yr13%20%35–55yr16%57%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close 3% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
3%1/33
the rest of the field
13%
240,396/1,819,532

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.

04the grantee network

20 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 20 of the 31 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/20
Grantees still filing
18/20
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Yale University — $400,000 · EducationYale UniversityJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY — $225,000 · EducationJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITYTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA — $220,000 · EducationTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIAUniversity of Chicago — $150,000 · EducationUniversity of ChicagoDUKE UNIVERSITY — $150,000 · EducationDUKE UNIVERSITYVanderbilt University — $150,000 · EducationVanderbilt UniversityUniversity of San Francisco — $150,000 · EducationUniversity of San Francisco+3 more — $88,111 · Education+3 moreState University of Iowa — $292,450 · OtherState University of IowaTHE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY — $225,000 · OtherTHE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITYUNIVERSITY OF COLORADO — $100,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF COLORADOUNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI — $75,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATIUNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL — $53,455 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOLTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS — $41,650 · OtherATS FOUNDATION INC — $41,000 · OtherALBANY MED HEALTH SYSTEM — $37,250 · Other+5 more — $103,500 · Other+5 moreNATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH — $458,500 · HealthNATIONAL JEWISH HEALTHOklahoma Medical Research Foundation — $150,000 · HealthOklahoma Medical Research F…THE CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION — $101,700 · HealthTHE CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDA…AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION — $64,000 · HealthAMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATIONMAYO CLINIC — $50,500 · HealthMAYO CLINIC+2 more — $19,000 · HealthNorthwestern University — $85,250 · Recreation & Sports
Education$1,533,111Other$969,305Health$843,700Recreation & Sports$85,250

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetNATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH — $458,500 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetYale University — $400,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY — $225,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA — $220,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Chicago — $150,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDUKE UNIVERSITY — $150,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetVanderbilt University — $150,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of San Francisco — $150,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOklahoma Medical Research Foundation — $150,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION — $101,700 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetNorthwestern University — $85,250 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION — $64,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMAYO CLINIC — $50,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN THORACIC SOCIETY INC — $43,111 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetATS FOUNDATION INC — $41,000 over 2y, 9.4% of budgetTHOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY — $25,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSTATE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA FOUNDATION — $20,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetUPLIFTING ATHLETES INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetMEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA FOUNDATION — $9,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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 NATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH
  • Who funds Yale University
  • Who funds JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
  • Who funds TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
  • Who funds University of Chicago
  • Who funds DUKE UNIVERSITY
  • Who funds Vanderbilt University
  • Who funds University of San Francisco
  • Who funds Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation
  • Who funds THE CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION
  • Who funds Northwestern University
  • Who funds AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION
  • Who funds MAYO CLINIC
  • Who funds AMERICAN THORACIC SOCIETY INC
  • Who funds ATS FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY
  • Who funds STATE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA FOUNDATION
  • Who funds UPLIFTING ATHLETES INC
  • Who funds MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA FOUNDATION

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.

Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Foundation for Sarcoidosis Research 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%your share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 12%
  • Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation31% of income from government
  • Johns Hopkins University12% of income from government
  • Yale University12% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
2report 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, FY2025

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 31 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph