· Public charity
Lundquist Institute for Biomedical Innovation at Harbor-Ucla Medical Center
To engage in biomedical research, train young scientists, and provide community health services.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 68% of LUNDQUIST INSTITUTE FOR BIOMEDICAL INNOVATION AT HARBOR-UCLA MEDICAL CENTER’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 29 grants below total $3,256,677 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $3,967,899 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $711,222 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 · FY2022
- $10k–50k11 grants · $264k
- $50k–250k14 grants · $1.5M
- $250k+4 grants · $1.5M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS | $509,561 |
| EASTERN VIRGINIA MEDICAL SCHOOL | $343,904 |
| UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER AT SAN ANTONIO | $315,527 |
| UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA | $283,678 |
| REGENTS UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES | $227,113 |
| UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND | $215,063 |
| KUMC RESEARCH INSTITUTE | $157,400 |
| SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CROSSROADS | $129,649 |
| REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA | $102,991 |
| BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA | $97,500 |
| UNIV OF ROCHESTER | $96,914 |
| CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY | $95,248 |
| WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY | $87,360 |
| POPULATION COUNCIL | $74,867 |
| NATIONWIDE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION | $74,568 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–22) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 70% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
Which US states your grants reach
Grants abroad, by region — $231k on the FY2025 return
Schedule F, as filed: 3 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: SUPPORT GENERAL OPERATIONS
Stated purpose: SUPPORT GENERAL OPERATIONS
Stated purpose: SUPPORT GENERAL OPERATIONS
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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +63% since the first grant, against +35% for the ones you funded once.
23 repeat relationships — 21 still active in FY2022, 2 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2022, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $252k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY3× · 2020–2022 · $890k · revenue +16%- UOUNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER RESEARCH INSTITUTE3× · 2020–2022 · $396k · revenue +65%
- SCSOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CROSSROADS3× · 2020–2022 · $244k · revenue +63%
Funded once
DUKE UNIVERSITYgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $506k · revenue +49%
CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTERgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $114k · revenue +31%- CMCarnegie Mellon Universitygraduatedone grant, 2020 · $103k · revenue +35%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
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,…
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.
See Form 990, Part I, Line 1, Description of Organization Mission.
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…
Drexel university fulfills its founder's vision of preparing each new generation of students for productive professional and civic lives while also focusing its collective expertise on solving society's greatest problems. drexel is an…
Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.
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.
Charles r. drew university of medicine and science is a private non-profit student-centered university that is committed to cultivating diverse health professional leaders who are dedicated to social justice and health equity for…
Education, research, medical services and other public services.
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…
We educate the next generation of leaders to improve the health of our society.
Case Western Reserve University is an independent, research-oriented university with broadly based strengths in health, including medicine, nursing and dentistry; in engineering; in the arts and sciences; and in law, management and social…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Carnegie Mellon University and the most unlike its peers is Rancho Research Institute. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 61 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
19 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 19 of the 39 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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 WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds DUKE UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER RESEARCH INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds THE POPULATION COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CROSSROADS ↗
- Who funds Trustees of Dartmouth College ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds Carnegie Mellon University ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ↗
- Who funds OLIVE VIEW-UCLA EDUCATION AND RESEARCH INSTITUE INC ↗
- Who funds BROWN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN COLLEGE OF EMERGENCY PHYSICIANS ↗
- Who funds Rancho Research Institute ↗
- Who funds SEATTLE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL ↗
- Who funds EMERGENCY NURSES ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds LOMA LINDA UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Yale University · California Community Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Lundquist Institute for Biomedical Innovation at Harbor-Ucla Medical Center 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.
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.