Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Lazarex Cancer Foundation

We strive to improve cancer health outcomes, FDA cancer clinical trial diversity and enrollment, and patient access to care by providing assistance with clinical trial navigation, reimbursing trial related travel costs, and partnering with at-risk communities to mobilize resources.

$569k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$214k
Largest
01What you fund
0197% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Health$2.9MEducation$1.8MHuman Services$327kCommunity Improvement$172kEmployment$140kYouth Development$99kOther$0
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 6 grants below total $506,016 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $568,857 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $62,841 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

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $11k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $495k
$60,138
Median grant
2
States reached
$690k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
University of Southern Cal$214,300
Monument Crisis Center$105,138
Monument Impact$60,138
Village Community Center$60,138
Drexel University$55,000
Center for Human Development$11,302
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:

Your human-services grants (FY23–25, $180k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%Monument Crisis Center: $105k → 9%Monument Crisis Center: $45k → 9%Monument Crisis Center: $30k → 9%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.

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.

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.

59%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$2.8M · 7 repeat orgs$2.0M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +3% since the first grant, against -64% for the ones you funded once.

7 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
6

Total granted

$2.8M
$2.0M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+3%
-64%

Still filing today

71%
17%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationHuman ServicesEmploymentHealthOther

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

  • DU
    DREXEL UNIVERSITY
    7× · 2018–2025 · $1.5M · revenue +7%
  • MC
    MONUMENT CRISIS CENTER
    3× · 2023–2025 · $180k · revenue +8%
  • MI
    MONUMENT IMPACT
    3× · 2023–2025 · $140k · revenue +2%

Funded once

  • MG
    MASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORATED
    one grant, 2017 · $1.2M
  • UN
    USC Norris Cancer Center
    one grant, 2023 · $377k
  • UA
    UTMD ANDERSON
    one grant, 2021 · $174k

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
Southern California University of Health Sciences

The mission of southern california university of health sciences (scu) is to educate students as competent, caring and successful practitioners of integrative healthcare. the university is committed to providing excellence in academics,…

Education
2
University of Miami

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

Education
3
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
4
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
5
Marshall B Ketchum University

To educate caring, inspired health care professionals who are prepared to deliver collaborative, patient-centric health care in an interprofessional environment.

Education
6
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.

Health
7
Sutter Bay Hospitals

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
8
University of Chicago Medical Center

Our mission at the university of chicago medicine is to provide superior health care through rigorous research, innovative education, and comprehensive care and healing. in partnership with our colleagues, we pursue life-changing…

Health
9
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
10
Albany College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences

We educate the next generation of leaders to improve the health of our society.

Education
11
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
12
Pomona College

Throughout its history, pomona college has educated men and women of exceptional promise. we gather individuals, regardless of financial circumstances, into a small residential community that is strongly rooted in southern california yet…

Education

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of California San Francisco Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Drexel University. 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

8 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. 8 of the 15 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)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

DREXEL UNIVERSITY — $1,516,983 · EducationDREXEL UNIVERSITYUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA — $697,050 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIAUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION — $384,699 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION+1 more — $86,400 · EducationMASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORATED — $1,178,881 · OtherMASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORATEDUSC Norris Cancer Center — $376,690 · OtherUSC Norris Cancer CenterIndividual grant recipient — $347,610 · OtherIndividual grant recipientUTMD ANDERSON — $174,129 · OtherUTMD ANDERSONVillage Community Center — $146,887 · OtherVillage Community CenterCENTER FOR HUMAN DEVELOPMENT — $99,061 · OtherUniv of Texas MD Anderson — $87,065 · OtherUS Oncology Research LLC — $86,400 · OtherMONUMENT CRISIS CENTER — $180,145 · Human ServicesMONUMENT IMPACT — $139,685 · EmploymentTHE LEONARD & MADLYN ABRAMSON FAMILY CANCER RESEARCH INSTITUTE — $90,133 · Health
Education$2,685,132Other$2,496,723Human Services$180,145Employment$139,685Health$90,133

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 budgetDREXEL UNIVERSITY — $1,516,983 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA — $697,050 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION — $384,699 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetMONUMENT CRISIS CENTER — $180,145 over 3y, 2.6% of budgetMONUMENT IMPACT — $139,685 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetCENTER FOR HUMAN DEVELOPMENT — $99,061 over 3y, 2.0% of budgetTHE LEONARD & MADLYN ABRAMSON FAMILY CANCER RESEARCH INSTITUTE — $90,133 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA — $86,400 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 DREXEL UNIVERSITY
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION
  • Who funds MONUMENT CRISIS CENTER
  • Who funds MONUMENT IMPACT
  • Who funds CENTER FOR HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
  • Who funds THE LEONARD & MADLYN ABRAMSON FAMILY CANCER RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • Who funds TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization Lazarex Cancer Foundation 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%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%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 · 0–15%
    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 15 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph