· Public charity
Hansjorg Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering at Harvard Univ Inc
Formed as a supporting organization of president and fellows of harvard college to conduct, support and develop research and inventions in the life sciences and engineering.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 12 grants below total $9,249,939 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $9,605,705 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $355,766 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 · FY2025
- $50k–250k4 grants · $639k
- $250k+8 grants · $8.6M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ATTIVARE THERAPEUTICS INC | $1,693,161 |
| MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY | $1,375,366 |
| CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL CORPORATION | $1,173,360 |
| DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE INC | $1,102,639 |
| THE MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL | $1,096,260 |
| ENPLUSONE BIOSCIENCES INC | $1,051,207 |
| THE BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL INC | $858,606 |
| ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI | $260,039 |
| BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER | $196,291 |
| TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY | $193,258 |
| THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA | $164,224 |
| TRUSTEES OF TUFTS COLLEGE | $85,528 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 68% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +45% since the first grant, against +16% for the ones you funded once.
31 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2025, 21 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.1M went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- CHChildren's Hospital Corporation9× · 2017–2025 · $8.9M · revenue +69%
ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI6× · 2020–2025 · $6.0M · revenue +39%
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc9× · 2017–2025 · $5.7M · revenue +132%
Funded once
- EIEmulate Incone grant, 2017 · $1.2M
- RIREADCOOR INCone grant, 2018 · $1.1M
- ASADAPTIVE SURFACE TECH INC (FORMERLY SLIPS TECHone grant, 2017 · $75k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
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.
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…
We educate the next generation of leaders to improve the health of our society.
See Form 990, Part I, Line 1, Description of Organization Mission.
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.
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…
Sanford burnham prebys medical discovery institute's mission is to advance the biomedical sciences by cultivating the next generation of scientific leaders, providing meaningful opportunities for researchers of all backgrounds to learn,…
Dartmouth College educates the most promising students and prepares them for a lifetime of learning and of responsible leadership, through a faculty dedicated to teaching and the creation of knowledge.
Fred hutch cancer center ("fred hutch") unites innovative research and compassionate care to prevent and eliminate cancer and infectious disease. continued on schedule o
Operate a state-of-the-art, world-class genomic research center that creates and uses advanced genomics to understand the genetic basis of disease. for more information, see schedule o.
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…
Thomas jefferson university ("tju") is a comprehensive university with preeminence in transdisciplinary, experiential professional education, research and discovery, delivering exceptional value for the 21st century students with…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Trustees of Tufts College and the most unlike its peers is The Cloud Artscience Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 62 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
25 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 25 of the 43 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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 Children's Hospital Corporation ↗
- Who funds Massachusetts Institute of Technology ↗
- Who funds ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI ↗
- Who funds Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc ↗
- Who funds COLD SPRING HARBOR LABORATORY ↗
- Who funds J CRAIG VENTER INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds METIS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Trustees of Tufts College ↗
- Who funds BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds Cornell University ↗
- Who funds NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds The Research Foundation for The State University of New York ↗
- Who funds MAYO CLINIC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA ↗
- Who funds The Trustees of Princeton University ↗
- Who funds Temple University - Of The Commonwealth System of Higher Education ↗
- Who funds THE CLOUD ARTSCIENCE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MASSACHUSETTS EYE & EAR INFIRMARY ↗
- Who funds University of Louisville Research Foundation ↗
- Who funds NUCLEATE BIO INC ↗
- Who funds Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago ↗
- Who funds WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Johns Hopkins University
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 Hansjorg Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering at Harvard Univ Inc 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology — 35% of income from government
- Trustees of Tufts College — 13% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston University — 12% of income from government
- The Trustees of Princeton University — 11% of income from government
- Children's Hospital Corporation — 10% of income from government
- Northeastern University — 7% of income from government
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — 7% of income from government
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Inc — 6% of income from government
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.