Skip to content
Luminous Web Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Luminous Web 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.

$202k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$202k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its 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.

Arts & Culture$210kInternational$41kHealth$25kPhilanthropy$23kHuman Services$13kEnvironment$2k
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$202,348
Median grant
1
States reached
$1000k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Reconnect - Today$202,348
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 (FY18–19, $13k) land where the poverty rate runs at 22%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 14%Nationalities Service Center: $8k → 22%Nationalities Service Center: $5k → 22%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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

31%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$96k · 5 repeat orgs$218k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +20% since the first grant, against -6% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
5

Total granted

$96k
$16k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+20%
-6%

Still filing today

80%
60%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $202k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’22’23’24
EducationReligionHuman ServicesArts & CultureHealthOther
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

  • TW
    TOMORROW'S WOMEN
    5× · 2017–2022 · $41k · revenue +83%
  • THE LENNY ZAKIM FUND
    4× · 2017–2023 · $23k · revenue -47%
  • NS
    NATIONALITIES SERVICE CENTER OF PHILADELPHIA
    2× · 2018–2019 · $13k · revenue -40%

Funded once

  • ZC
    Zakim Center
    one grant, 2018 · $4k
  • NM
    National MS Society
    one grant, 2017 · $4k
  • TS
    THE STORYDANCER PROJECT INC
    one grant, 2019 · $3k · revenue -31%
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
The Conversationalist
—
2
Direct Action for Women Now World-Wide Inc Formerly Indias Daughters Inc
Philanthropy
3
Women Donors Network

Women donors network advances a just, equitable, and sustainable world through the power of philanthropy, women's leadership, and collective and individual action.

Philanthropy
4
Nia Tero Foundation

Nia tero works alongside indigenous peoples to secure their guardianship of vital ecosystems. indigenous peoples are guardians of earth.(see schedule o)

Environment
5
Compass Science Communication Inc

Compass champions, connects, and supports diverse scientist leaders to improve the well-being of people and nature.

Science & Tech
6
Targeting Resistance in Cancer Cooperative
Health
7
National Women's Health Resource Center Inc

Educate women about their health and to empower them to live healthy and productive lives.

Health
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
Fajr Scientific

To provide multi-specialty surgical care, humanitarian aid and educational support to people in low- and middle-income countries.

Science & Tech
10
International Myeloma Foundation

Dedicated to improving the quality of life of myeloma patients while working toward prevention and a cure.

Unclassified
11
Mind Share Partners

The mission of mind share partners is to build awareness, support, and acceptance for people with mental health conditions.

Human Services
12
Global Network of Women Peacebuilders Inc

The gnwp is a coalition of more than 100 womens rights groups and other civil society organizations continued on schedule o

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Lenny Zakim Fund; the most unlike its peers is The Storydancer Project 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

8 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. 8 of the 11 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
2/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

RECONNECT-TODAY: $202,348 · EducationRECONNECT-TODAYTOMORROW'S WOMEN: $41,000 · OtherTOMORROW'S WOMENPAN-MASSACHUSETTS CHALLENGE INC: $11,000 · OtherPAN-MASSACHUSETTS CHALLEN…Zakim Center Events: $8,000 · OtherZakim Center EventsZakim Center: $4,000 · OtherZakim CenterNational MS Society: $4,000 · OtherNational MS Society+1 more: $2,000 · OtherTHE LENNY ZAKIM FUND: $23,000 · ReligionNATIONALITIES SERVICE CENTER OF PHILADELPHIA: $13,000 · Human ServicesTHE STORYDANCER PROJECT INC: $3,000 · Arts & CultureNATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY: $2,500 · Health
Education$202,348Other$70,000Religion$23,000Human Services$13,000Arts & Culture$3,000Health$2,500

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 budgetRECONNECT-TODAY: $202,348 over 1y, 100% of budgetTOMORROW'S WOMEN: $41,000 over 5y, 1.2% of budgetTHE LENNY ZAKIM FUND: $23,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetNATIONALITIES SERVICE CENTER OF PHILADELPHIA: $13,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetPAN-MASSACHUSETTS CHALLENGE INC: $11,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWILDEARTH GUARDIANS: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Luminous Web Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Luminous Web Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Pan-Massachusetts Challenge Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
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 11 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.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2024, the most recent year this funder made grants.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Luminous Web’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