Skip to content
Harvard Neurodiscovery Center Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Harvard Neurodiscovery Center Inc

Neuroscience-related research

$705k
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$369k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

73% of Harvard Neurodiscovery Center Inc’s FY2024 grant dollars went to President And Fellows Of Harvard College, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 4 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.

Organizations named directly on the return

3
’18
3
’19
5
’20
5
’21
4
’22
5
’23
4
’24

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

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$3.4MScience & Tech$3.3MEducation$300k
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $14k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $113k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $209k
  • $250k+1 grant · $369k
$49,981
Median grant
1
States reached
$1k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HMS - PRESIDENT & FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE$368,514
BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY$121,218
MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL$87,856
BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER$49,981
BOSTON CHILDRENS HOSPITAL$40,707
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY$22,113
SCHEPENS EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE$7,759
BOSTON UNIVERSITY$6,667
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY18–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY: $121k → 8%BRIGHAM & WOMEN'S HOSPITAL: $958k → 16%BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY: $111k → 8%BOSTON CHILDRENS HOSPITAL: $209k → 16%BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY: $68k → 8%BRIGHAM & WOMEN'S HOSPITAL: $208k → 16%PRESIDENT & FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE: $1.1M → 8%BOSTON CHILDRENS HOSPITAL: $163k → 16%HMS - PRESIDENT & FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE: $571k → 8%BOSTON CHILDRENS HOSPITAL: $155k → 16%HMS - PRESIDENT & FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE: $468k → 8%BOSTON CHILDRENS HOSPITAL: $99k → 16%HMS - PRESIDENT & FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE: $369k → 8%BOSTON CHILDRENS HOSPITAL: $41k → 16%MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $193k → 8%BOSTON CHILDRENS HOSPITAL: $31k → 16%PRESIDENT & FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE: $175k → 8%BRIGHAM & WOMEN'S HOSPITAL: $30k → 16%MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $66k → 8%BOSTON CHILDRENS HOSPITAL: $18k → 16%MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $22k → 8%BRIGHAM & WOMEN'S HOSPITAL: $7k → 16%PRESIDENT & FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE: $14k → 8%BOSTON UNIVERSITY: $190k → 16%PRESIDENT & FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE: $6k → 8%BOSTON UNIVERSITY: $85k → 16%DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE: $70k → 16%MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $257k → 16%DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE: $65k → 16%MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL: $244k → 16%DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE: $58k → 16%MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL: $176k → 16%BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER: $50k → 16%SCHEPENS EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $148k → 16%BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER: $50k → 16%MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL: $89k → 16%DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE: $43k → 16%MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL: $88k → 16%Dana Farber Cancer Institute: $32k → 16%MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL: $36k → 16%BOSTON UNIVERSITY: $24k → 16%MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $23k → 16%BOSTON UNIVERSITY: $21k → 16%MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL: $8k → 16%BOSTON UNIVERSITY: $7k → 16%SCHEPENS EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $8k → 16%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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.4M · 6 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
0

Total granted

$3.4M
$0

Still filing today

50%
0%

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
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

  • CH
    Children's Hospital Corporation
    7× · 2018–2024 · $715k · revenue +78%
  • BI
    BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $427k · revenue +64%
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc
    5× · 2019–2023 · $267k · revenue +97%

Funded once

    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
    04the grantee network

    7 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. 7 of the 9 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)
    6/7
    Grantees still filing
    7/7
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    President and Fellows of Harvard College: $2,691,774 · EducationPresident and Fellows of Harvard CollegeMassachusetts Institute of Technology: $560,552 · EducationMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyBRANDEIS UNIVERSITY: $299,887 · EducationBRANDEIS UNIVERSITYMASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORATED: $1,203,089 · OtherMASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORA…MASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORATED: $641,539 · OtherMASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORA…Children's Hospital Corporation: $715,332 · HealthChildren's Hospital Corpo…BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER INC: $426,821 · HealthBETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MED…Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: $267,033 · HealthDana-Farber Cancer Instit…Schepens Eye Research Institute Inc: $156,000 · HealthSchepens Eye Research Ins…
    Education$3,552,213Other$1,844,628Health$1,565,186

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

    25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $2,691,774 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetChildren's Hospital Corporation: $715,332 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetMassachusetts Institute of Technology: $560,552 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetBETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER INC: $426,821 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetBRANDEIS UNIVERSITY: $299,887 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: $267,033 over 5y, 0.0% 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 President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗
    • Who funds Children's Hospital Corporation ↗
    • Who funds Massachusetts Institute of Technology ↗
    • Who funds BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER INC ↗
    • Who funds BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY ↗
    • Who funds Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc ↗
    • Who funds Schepens Eye Research Institute Inc ↗

    How much its grantees rely on government

    Each dot is one organization Harvard Neurodiscovery Center Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Harvard Neurodiscovery Center Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

    2024
    ’20’21’22’23’24’25
    no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 9%
    • Massachusetts Institute of Technology: 35% of income from government
    • Children's Hospital Corporation: 10% of income from government
    • Brandeis University: 9% of income from government
    • President and Fellows of Harvard College: 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
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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 Harvard Neurodiscovery Center Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Harvard Neurodiscovery Center Inc 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 9 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.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $13k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Harvard Neurodiscovery Center’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