Skip to content
LSF Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Private foundation

LSF Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$945k
Granted FY2024still arriving
12
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$100k
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.

Human Services$360kEducation$345kHealth$205kHousing & Shelter$180kCrime & Legal$140kFood & Nutrition$100k
02FY2024 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $50k–250k11 grants · $940k
$100,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$22M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Houston Area Women's Center$100,000
Ronald McDonald$100,000
Interfaith Ministries$100,000
Houston Food Bank$100,000
NW Assist Ministries$100,000
Planned Parenthood$100,000
Children's Assessment Center$100,000
BEAR$60,000
Wellsprings Village Inc$60,000
SEARCH$60,000
Mission of YAHWEH$60,000
Serve Up A Cure Houston$4,500
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 14%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 70% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%Landmark School: $200k → 10%Children's Assessment Center: $100k → 16%Landmark School: $125k → 10%Serve Up A Cure Houston: $5k → 16%Ronald McDonald: $100k → 16%Interfaith Ministries: $100k → 16%SEARCH: $60k → 16%Houston Food Bank: $100k → 16%NW Assist Ministries: $100k → 16%Mission of YAHWEH: $60k → 16%Child Advocates: $40k → 16%Planned Parenthood: $100k → 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 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
Childs Place

The mission of Childs Place is to listen to children in a safe developmentally sensitive and legally sound manner; to unite professionals in a coordinated response to child abuse; to guide children and families toward healing through…

Human Services
2
Women's Law Project

Women's law project creates a more just and equitable society by advancing the rights and status of all women throughout their lives. to this end, we engage in high-impact litigation, advocacy, and education. the core values of women's law…

Civil Rights
3
Family Services Inc

To strengthen the well-being and development of families and individuals through professional human services programs, including therapy, counseling, education, special assistance, and advocacy.

Human Services
4
Children's Advocacy Center of Greater West Texas

The children's advocacy center of greater west texas, inc.'s mission is to champion the prevention of child abuse and to serve as an ally of abused children with a dedication to securing a safe and nurturing home for each child.

Civil Rights
5
The Childrens House

To reduce trauma to children who have experienced abuse as well as their families by providing a safe and supportive environment through a collaboration of community agencies.

—
6
Young Women's Christian Association of Rochester and Monroe County

The ywca is dedicated to eliminating racism, empowering women and promoting peace, justice, freedom and dignity for all.

Human Services
7
Women Against Abuse Inc

The mission of women against abuse is to provide quality, compassionate, and nonjudgmental services in a manner that fosters self-respect and independence in persons experiencing intimate partner violence and to lead the struggle to end…

Human Services
8
The Women's Center Inc

To provide safety, shelter and support to empower all impacted by domestic abuse, sexual violence, child abuse & trafficking.

Human Services
9
A Woman's Place

A woman's place envisions a society where all individuals are safe in their relationships and can thrive.

—
10
The Crawford Child Advocacy Center

The organization's mission is to prevent and respond to abuse and victimization through proven child-centered methods, professional forensic interviews, and collaborative advocacy.

Crime & Legal
11
Child Protection Center Inc

The mission of the child protection center, inc. is the prevention, intervention and treatment of child abuse. we envision a community where children are safe from abuse and free to thrive. to successfully address the issue of child abuse,…

Crime & Legal
12
Chicago Children's Advocacy Center

The chicago children's advocacy center unites public, private, and community partners to ensure the safety, health, and well-being of abused children.

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Houston Area Women's Center; the most unlike its peers is Planned Parenthood. 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

9 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. 9 of the 15 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
4/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Ronald McDonald: $100,000 · OtherRonald McDonaldInterfaith Ministries: $100,000 · OtherInterfaith MinistriesThe Houston Food Bank: $100,000 · OtherThe Houston Food BankNW Assist Ministries: $100,000 · OtherNW Assist MinistriesMISSION OF YAHWEH INC: $60,000 · OtherMISSION OF YAHWEH INCBEAR: $60,000 · OtherBEARSEARCH: $60,000 · OtherSEARCH+1 more: $4,500 · OtherLANDMARK SCHOOL INC: $325,000 · EducationLANDMARK SCHOOL INCUNIVERSITY OF DENVER: $20,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF DENVERHouston Area Women's Center: $100,000 · Human ServicesHouston Area …WELLSPRINGS VILLAGE INC: $60,000 · Human ServicesWELLSPRINGS V…Children's Assessment Center Foundation: $100,000 · Crime & LegalChildren's …CHILD ADVOCATES INC: $40,000 · Crime & LegalCHILD ADVOC…PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $100,000 · Health
Other$584,500Education$345,000Human Services$160,000Crime & Legal$140,000Health$100,000

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 budgetLANDMARK SCHOOL INC: $325,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetChildren's Assessment Center Foundation: $100,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetThe Houston Food Bank: $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHouston Area Women's Center: $100,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD: $100,000 over 1y, 37% of budgetMISSION OF YAHWEH INC: $60,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetCHILD ADVOCATES INC: $40,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF DENVER: $20,000 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.

Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA5.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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
    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 15 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on LSF’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