Skip to content
L & S Hayward Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

L & S Hayward Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$219k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$175k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Health$299kHuman Services$195kPhilanthropy$25kYouth Development$8kRecreation & Sports$6kEnvironment$5kReligion$5kEducation$4kOther$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $7k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $37k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $175k
$2,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$1.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FOR OTHERS COLLECTIVE$175,000
CREWE FOUNDATION$25,000
PHOENIX CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL$12,000
MOTHER'S GRACE$2,000
LIGHTHOUSE FOR HOPE INC$2,000
OPERATION CHRISTMAS MAGIC$1,500
PAW PLACEMENT OF NORTHERN ARIZONA$1,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY23–25, $193k) land where the poverty rate runs at 4%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 1% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%FOR OTHERS COLLECTIVE: $175k → 4%MICHAEL PHELPS FOUNDATION: $6k → 7%ANGEL ARMIES INC: $10k → 4%MOTHER'S GRACE: $2k → 11%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

ME
ID
MN
NY
CA
UT
AZ
TN
DC
TX
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.

40%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$247k · 4 repeat orgs$375k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +47% since the first grant, against +14% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
16

Total granted

$247k
$347k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+47%
+14%

Still filing today

75%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $28k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthHuman ServicesEducationPhilanthropyAnimalsOther
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

  • FO
    FOR OTHERS COLLECTIVE INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $185k · revenue 0%
  • PC
    Phoenix Children's Hospital
    6× · 2020–2025 · $53k · revenue +47%
  • OC
    OPERATION CHRISTMAS MAGIC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $7k

Funded once

  • BH
    Banner Health
    one grant, 2021 · $140k · revenue +24%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $75k
  • BN
    BARROW NEUROLOGICAL FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $40k · revenue +44%
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
Banner -University Medical Group

Assist banner health complete its mission to make health care easier so life can be better by providing integrated & coordinated care & population health management.

Health
2
Honorhealth

Honorhealth's mission is to improve the health and well-being of those we serve.

Health
3
Children's Hospital Corporation

Provider of pediatric healthcare, education, research & community service

Health
4
Children's Health Care

We champion the health needs of children and families. we are committed to improving children's health by providing the highest-quality, family centered care, advanced through research and education.

Health
5
Arizona Cancer Foundation for Children Inc

Arizona Cancer Foundation for Children provides social, emotional, and financial support to families managing the health and well-being of a loved one with pediatric cancer.

Public Benefit
6
Children's Clinics for Rehabilitative Services

The children's clinics provides a family centered comprehensive medical home to meet the special needs of children and families.

Health
7
City of Hope National Medical Center

City of Hope National Medical Center's mission is to make hope a reality for all touched by cancer and diabetes. PLEASE SEE SCHEDULE O FOR A CONTINUATION OF OUR MISSION

Health
8
Banner Medical Group

To assist banner health complete its mission, banner medical group (bmg) was created to make health care easier, so life can be better by providing integrated & coordinated care & population health management.

Health
9
Clinical Health Network for Transformation Inc

Chn's mission is to provide support services for chn members to allow members to focus on their missions of providing superior patient care.

Health
10
Cook Children's Medical Center

Knowing that every child's life is sacred, our promise is to improve the health of every child in our region through the prevention and treatment of illness, disease and injury.

Health
11
Pacific Central Coast Health Centers

Pacific central coast health centers', sponsored by dignity community care, mission is to provide access to cost effective, quality medical services in the northern santa barbara county, san luis obispo county, kern county and ventura…

Health
12
City of Hope

City of Hope's mission is to make hope a reality for all touched by cancer and diabetes. PLEASE SEE SCHEDULE O FOR A CONTINUATION OF OUR MISSION

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Barrow Neurological Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Crewe Foundation. 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

16 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. 16 of the 24 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/16
Grantees still filing
11/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Banner Health: $140,000 · HealthBanner HealthPhoenix Children's Hospital: $52,750 · HealthPhoenix Children's HospitalBARROW NEUROLOGICAL FOUNDATION: $40,000 · HealthBARROW NEUROLOGICAL FOUNDATIONCancer Support Community Arizona: $25,000 · HealthCancer Support Community ArizonaPhoenix Children's Hospital Foundation: $10,000 · Health+3 more: $5,500 · HealthFOR OTHERS COLLECTIVE INC: $185,000 · Human ServicesFOR OTHERS COLLECTIVE INC+2 more: $8,250 · Human ServicesIndividual grant recipient: $75,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipi…CANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY: $25,000 · OtherCANCER SUPPORT COMMUNIT…KEEP CHILDREN ROCKIN: $7,000 · OtherKEEP CHILDREN ROCKINOPERATION CHRISTMAS MAGIC: $6,500 · OtherDel Mar Beach Preservation Coalition: $5,000 · OtherVALLEY PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH: $5,000 · Other+4 more: $3,500 · OtherCREWE FOUNDATION: $25,000 · PhilanthropyUniversity of Arizona Foundation: $3,540 · EducationPAW PLACEMENT OF NORTHERN ARIZONA: $1,000 · Animals
Health$273,250Human Services$193,250Other$127,000Philanthropy$25,000Education$3,540Animals$1,000

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 budgetFOR OTHERS COLLECTIVE INC: $185,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetBanner Health: $140,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPhoenix Children's Hospital: $52,750 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetBARROW NEUROLOGICAL FOUNDATION: $40,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCancer Support Community Arizona: $25,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetCANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY: $25,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetPhoenix Children's Hospital Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE MICHAEL PHELPS FOUNDATION: $6,250 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetUniversity of Arizona Foundation: $3,540 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLIGHTHOUSE FOR HOPE INC: $3,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetWIGGED OUT INC: $1,500 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetMAYO CLINIC: $1,000 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.

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.

Thunderbirds CharitiesArizona Community Fou…American Endowment Fo…Natl Christian Charit…Paypal Charitable Giv…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Thunderbirds CharitiesAZ13.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Thunderbirds Charities · Arizona Community Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 L & S Hayward Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from L & S Hayward Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s 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 · 0–10%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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 24 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on L & S Hayward’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