Skip to content
International Center for Responsible Gaming at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

International Center for Responsible Gaming

To fund research regarding gambling addictions and find treatment for the disease.

$1.7M
Granted FY2024still arriving
11
Grants FY2024still arriving
8
States reached
$205k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its 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$2.2MRecreation & Sports$709kScience & Tech$604kEducation$69kYouth Development$44kCrime & Legal$8k
02FY2024 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 11 grants below total $1,477,904, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,733,687 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $255,783 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.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $96k
  • $50k–250k8 grants · $1.4M
$171,957
Median grant
8
States reached
$6.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE UNIVERSITY OF MEMPHIS$205,370
WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY$172,500
THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY$172,500
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA$172,498
RUTGERS UNIVERSITY$172,038
CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE$171,957
EAST TENNESSEE STATE UNIVERSITY$170,782
HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL$144,259
UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA$46,000
CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE$40,000
THE ASSN OF CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIO$10,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 63% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE: $172k → 8%UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON: $35k → 16%UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO: $19k → 14%THE ASSN OF CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIO: $10k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA: $172k → 19%UNIVERSITY OF IOWA: $35k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT: $35k → 11%EAST TENNESSEE STATE UNIVERSITY: $171k → 14%THE UNIVERSITY OF MEMPHIS: $205k → 17%PROVIDENCE COLLEGE: $22k → 14%BOWLING GREEN UNIVERSITY: $403k → 12%THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $173k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON: $134k → 9%WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY: $173k → 19%RUTGERS UNIVERSITY: $306k → 8%HBSA PACIFIC INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH AND EVALUATION: $292k → 11%UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE: $35k → 19%HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL: $144k → 8%UNIVERSITY OF MEMPHIS: $32k → 17%BOWLING GREEN STATE UNIVERSITY: $35k → 12%SEATTLE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $35k → 9%RUTGERS UNIVERSITY: $172k → 8%CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE: $40k → 8%RUTGERS UNIVERSITY: $44k → 8%RUTGERS UNIVERSITY: $35k → 8%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

WA
MA
NV
IA
OH
NJ
CT
RI
CA
MO
WV
MD
NM
TN
DC
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region: $256k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 2 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$219k · 85% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: A SAFE BET DESIGN AND EVALUATION OF A PLAYER TAILORED ONLINE RESPONSIBLE GAMBLING PROMOTION FRAMEWORK · PRECLINICAL MODELING OF GAMBLING DISORDER THE PROLONGED IMPACT OF PREDICTABLE VS UNPREDICTABLE EARLY LIFE STRESS ON ADULTHOOD UNCERTAINTY INDUCED ADDICTION LIKE BEHAVIOURS IN RATS

North America (Canada and Mexico)$37k · 15% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: THE BALODIS ICRG 2023 ALCOHOL EFFECT IN PROBLEM GAMBLING

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. 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.
03Its field
04the grantee network

5 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. 5 of the 28 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)
5/5
Grantees still filing
4/5
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CURATORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI: $396,559 · OtherCURATORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURIRUTGERS THE STATE UNIVERSITY: $384,168 · OtherRUTGERS THE STATE UNIVERSITYCAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE: $211,957 · OtherCAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCETHE UNIVERSITY OF MEMPHIS: $205,370 · OtherTHE UNIVERSITY OF MEMPHISWEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY: $172,500 · OtherWEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITYTHE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $172,500 · OtherTHE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITYUNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA: $172,498 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF FLORIDARUTGERS UNIVERSITY: $172,038 · OtherRUTGERS UNIVERSITYEAST TENNESSEE STATE UNIVERSITY: $170,782 · OtherEAST TENNESSEE STATE UNIVERSITYUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO: $149,500 · OtherHARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL: $144,259 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON: $133,970 · Other+12 more: $357,377 · Other+12 moreBOWLING GREEN STATE UNIVERSITY FACULTY ASSOCIATION - AAUP: $402,500 · EmploymentBOWLING GREE…PACIFIC INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH AND EVALUATION: $291,868 · Science & TechPACIFIC I…University of Houston Foundation: $34,500 · EducationPROVIDENCE COLLEGE: $22,040 · Education
Other$2,843,478Employment$402,500Science & Tech$291,868Education$56,540

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

25%50%75%100%$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPACIFIC INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH AND EVALUATION: $291,868 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetUniversity of Houston Foundation: $34,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSeattle Children's Foundation: $34,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPROVIDENCE COLLEGE: $22,040 over 1y, 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 BOWLING GREEN STATE UNIVERSITY FACULTY ASSOCIATION - AAUP ↗
  • Who funds PACIFIC INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH AND EVALUATION ↗
  • Who funds University of Houston Foundation ↗
  • Who funds Seattle Children's Foundation ↗
  • Who funds PROVIDENCE COLLEGE ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization International Center for Responsible Gaming funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from International Center for Responsible Gaming. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 32%
  • Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation: 32% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
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.

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 28 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 International Center for Responsible Gaming’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