Skip to content
Leban Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Leban Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$4k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$4k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0192% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Education$6kInternational$4kArts & Culture$3kPhilanthropy$2kReligion$1kHealth$725Environment$550Public Safety & Disaster$500Other$0
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$4,200
Median grant
1
States reached
$42k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
International Rescue Committee$4,200
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 (FY17–19, $600) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Elder Care SVC Inc: $100 → 19%American Red Cross: $500 → 14%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

MT
IL
NY
MA
SD
CA
VA
DC
AL
GA
TX
FL
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.

45%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$9k · 10 repeat orgs$11k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +86% since the first grant, against +36% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
21

Total granted

$9k
$7k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+86%
+36%

Still filing today

40%
43%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4k 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
EducationInternationalHuman ServicesEnvironmentPhilanthropyCrime & LegalOther
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

  • BF
    BILETNIKOFF FOUNDATION
    4× · 2017–2023 · $2k · revenue +86%
  • ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED
    2× · 2017–2018 · $400 · revenue +202%
  • SP
    SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $300 · revenue +10%

Funded once

  • WL
    Wellington Landing Med School
    one grant, 2018 · $1k
  • TS
    THE SCHOOL BOARD OF BROWARD COUNTY
    one grant, 2018 · $1k
  • SJ
    St James in the Hills
    one grant, 2022 · $1k
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
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
2
Earth & Space Research

Increase societal understanding of the earth system through scientific research and education.

Science & Tech
3
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
4
Natural Resources Defense Council Inc

We safeguard the earth: its people, its plants and animals, and (see schedule o) the natural systems on which all life depends. we work to restore the integrity of the elements that sustain life - air, land, and water - to defend…

Environment
5
Third Way

To research and develop centrist policy ideas.

Civil Rights
6
University of Southern California

The central mission of the university of southern california is the development of human beings and society as a whole through the cultivation and enrichment of the human mind and spirit. the principal means by which our mission is…

Education
7
Ocean Conservancy

Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.

Environment
8
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
9
Conservation Law Foundation Inc

Conservation law foundation, inc. (clf) protects new england's environment for the benefit of all people and future generations. we use the law, science, and markets to create solutions that preserve and restore our natural resources,…

Environment
10
Climateworks Foundation

Climateworks foundation's mission is to connect philanthropy, grantees, and strategic partners to build and deliver high-impact climate solutions that benefit all people.

Science & Tech
11
Washington Office On Latin America

To advance human rights and social justice in the americas.

International
12
World Relief Corp of National Association of Evangelicals

To boldly engage the world's greatest crises in partnership with the church.

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated; the most unlike its peers is International Rescue Committee Inc. 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

15 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. 15 of the 33 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
11/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Gstar School for Performing Arts: $2,850 · OtherGstar School for Performing ArtsSouth Broward High School: $1,050 · OtherSouth Broward High SchoolWellington Landing Med School: $1,000 · OtherWellington Landing Med SchoolTHE SCHOOL BOARD OF BROWARD COUNTY: $1,000 · OtherTHE SCHOOL BOARD OF BROWARD COUNTYSt James in the Hills: $1,000 · OtherSt James in the HillsPROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CATHEDRAL FOUNDATION OF THE D OF C: $1,000 · OtherPROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CATHEDRAL FOUNDATION OF THE D OF CPBC Diabetes Coalition: $500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $480 · Other+12 more: $1,510 · Other+12 moreInternational Rescue Committee INC: $4,200 · InternationalInternational Rescue Com…+2 more: $125 · InternationalBILETNIKOFF FOUNDATION: $1,800 · PhilanthropyBILETNIKOF…CHRIS HIXON FOUNDATION CORPORATION: $600 · EducationCHRIS HIX…The Florida State University Foundation Inc: $500 · EducationThe Flori…Wellesley College: $500 · EducationWellesley…WELLESLEY STUDENTS' AID SOCIETY: $100 · EducationWELLESLEY…American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $500 · Human ServicesELDER CARE SERVICES INC: $100 · Human ServicesENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $400 · EnvironmentEARTHJUSTICE: $125 · EnvironmentSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $300 · Crime & Legal
Other$10,390International$4,325Philanthropy$1,800Education$1,700Human Services$600Environment$525Crime & Legal$300

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 budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $4,200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBILETNIKOFF FOUNDATION: $1,800 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetThe Florida State University Foundation Inc: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWellesley College: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $400 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $300 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEARTHJUSTICE: $125 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWELLESLEY STUDENTS' AID SOCIETY: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetELDER CARE SERVICES INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOPERATION SMILE INC: $75 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEASTER SEALS INC: $50 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC: $50 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $25 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile Foundation
Amazonsmile FoundationWA2.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Leban Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Leban Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 22%
  • Elder Care Services Inc: 22% of income from government
  • Wellesley College: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get 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 · 0–50%
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 33 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 Leban’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