Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Mario Lemieux Foundation

To fund promising patient care and medical research initiatives in the areas of hodgkin's disease, pediatric oncology, cardiovascular medicine, as well as support the development and implementation of hospital playrooms.

$2.9M
Granted FY2024still arriving
17
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$2.3M
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172024.

Health$15MHuman Services$501kRecreation & Sports$168kPhilanthropy$83kScience & Tech$50k
02FY2024 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k4 grants · $29k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $179k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $404k
  • $250k+1 grant · $2.3M
$19,780
Median grant
1
States reached
$19M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HIGHMARK HEALTH$2,277,948
UPMC PINNACLE$152,875
CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PITTSBURGH FOUNDATION$102,571
THE CHILDREN'S HOME OF PITTSBURGH$75,000
UPMC HILLMAN CANCER CENTER$73,272
CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PITTSBURGH FOUNDATION$45,562
PITTSBURGH PENGUINS FOUNDATION$33,500
CANCER BRIDGES$32,629
VALLEY MEDICAL FACILITIES INC$19,780
UPMC PASSAVANT$14,658
CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PITTSBURGH FOUNDATION$12,000
BUTLER HEALTH SYSTEM$11,143
THE CHILDREN'S HOME OF PITTSBURGH AND LEMIEUX FAMILY CENTER$10,000
HERITAGE VALLEY HEALTH SYSTEM INC$8,997
HIGHMARK HEALTH$7,796
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 (FY21–22, $159k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 94% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%WATSON INSITITUTE: $132k → 11%CLARK GILLIES FOUNDATION: $9k → 7%WATSON INSTITUTE: $19k → 11%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.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$13M · 16 repeat orgs$3.1M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +58% since the first grant, against +6% for the ones you funded once.

16 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
16

Total granted

$13M
$614k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+58%
+6%

Still filing today

75%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 14% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2.5M went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthPhilanthropyHuman ServicesOther

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

  • CH
    CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PITTSBURGH FOUNDATION
    8× · 2017–2024 · $5.6M · revenue +135%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AND UPMC MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES FOUNDATION
    6× · 2019–2024 · $4.8M · revenue +34% · 38% of their budget
  • TC
    THE CHILDREN'S HOME OF PITTSBURGH
    7× · 2017–2024 · $448k · revenue +61%

Funded once

  • NH
    NAVAL HOSPITAL CAMP PENDELTON
    one grant, 2021 · $142k
  • U
    UPMC
    one grant, 2017 · $89k
  • MR
    MAGEE-WOMENS RESEARCH INSTITUTE AND FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2023 · $80k · revenue -8%

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
Upmc Pinnacle Hospitals

Upmc pinnacle hospitals mission as a charitable organization is dedicatied to maintaining and improving the health and quality of life for all persons of the central pennsylvania area.

Health
2
Upmc

Support of subsidiary tax-exempt healthcare, education and research organizations (see schedule o)

Health
3
Upmc Group

Healthcare, education, and research

4
Upmc Carlisle

Upmc carlisle's mission is to serve the community by providing access to outstanding patient care and to shape tomorrow's health care system through clinical and technological innovation, research and education.

Health
5
Pinnacle Health Medical Services

Pinnacle health medical services is a charitable organization dedicated to maintaining and improving the health and quality of life for all the people of central pennsylvania by providing primary, clinic, family and specialty physician…

Health
6
Lehigh Valley Hospital

Our mission is to heal, comfort and care for the people of our community by providing advanced and compassionate health care of superior quality and value, supported by education and research.

Health
7
The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia

The children's hospital of philadelphia, the oldest hospital in the united states dedicated exclusively to pediatrics, strives to be the world leader in the advancement of health care for children by integrating excellent patient care,…

Health
8
The Johns Hopkins Hospital

For more than 125 years, the mission of the johns hopkins hospital has been to lead the world in the diagnosis and treatment of disease and to train tomorrow's great physicians, nurses and scientists. above all, we aim to provide the…

Health
9
Johns Hopkins Health System Corporation

Johns hopkins health system corporation provides centralized management of a multi-hospital healthcare system. it is a key component of johns hopkins medicine, a collaboration with the johns hopkins university school of medicine.

Health
10
Trihealth Physician Institute

Provides the community necessary medical care through specialty physicians.

Health
11
Mass General Brigham Incorporated & Affiliates Group Return

Mass general brigham incorporated is developing an integrated health care delivery system throughout the region that offers patients a continuum of coordinated, high-quality care.

Health
12
Clarion Hospital

Clarion hospital, an affiliate of independence health system, exists to provide a trusted delivery of care which makes a positive impact on the lives of every individual we touch.

Health

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Heritage Valley Health System Inc and the most unlike its peers is Clark Gillies Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyRetiree Health Benefits Tru…Senior Affordable HousingCharitable Donor TrustsMedical Research and Advoca…Early Childhood Care Centers
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 26 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number21%0%<5yr15%6%5–10yr20%32%10–20yr18%27%20–35yr13%27%35–55yr14%9%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value21%0%<5yr15%0%5–10yr20%23%10–20yr18%68%20–35yr13%5%35–55yr14%3%55yr+

The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close 3% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
3%1/37
the rest of the field
12%
2,963/25,714

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.

04the grantee network

25 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. 25 of the 38 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
25/25
Grantees still filing
14/25
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PITTSBURGH FOUNDATION — $5,577,810 · HealthCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PITTSBURGH FOUNDATIONTHE CHILDREN'S HOME OF PITTSBURGH — $448,479 · HealthTHE CHILDREN'S HOME OF PITTSBURGH+14 more — $610,553 · Health+14 moreUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AND UPMC MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES FOUNDATION — $4,848,812 · PhilanthropyUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AND UPMC M…+3 more — $104,566 · PhilanthropyHighmark Health Group — $2,277,948 · OtherHighmark Health GroupHIGHMARK HEALTH — $1,088,964 · OtherHIGHMARK HEALTHCarnegie Mellon University — $160,000 · Other+13 more — $746,906 · Other+13 moreTHE WATSON INSTITUTE — $150,004 · Human ServicesCLARK GILLIES FOUNDATION — $9,000 · Human Services
Health$6,636,842Philanthropy$4,953,378Other$4,273,818Human Services$159,004

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PITTSBURGH FOUNDATION — $5,577,810 over 8y, 7.1% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AND UPMC MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES FOUNDATION — $4,848,812 over 6y, 38% of budgetHighmark Health Group — $2,277,948 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CHILDREN'S HOME OF PITTSBURGH — $448,479 over 7y, 1.1% of budgetCarnegie Mellon University — $160,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetUPMC PINNACLE — $152,875 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE WATSON INSTITUTE — $150,004 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetRAINBOW BABIES & CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION — $135,083 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetMAGEE-WOMENS RESEARCH INSTITUTE AND FOUNDATION — $79,636 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPITTSBURGH PENGUINS FOUNDATION — $74,000 over 5y, 0.8% of budgetCANCER BRIDGES — $56,629 over 3y, 3.7% of budgetSTANLEY M MARKS BLOOD CANCER RESEARCH FUND — $37,000 over 7y, 1.3% of budgetALLEGHENY GENERAL HOSPITAL AUXILIARY — $22,079 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetLending Hearts — $20,000 over 4y, 2.6% of budgetVALLEY MEDICAL FACILITIES INC — $19,780 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWheeling Hospital Inc — $15,649 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHighmark Health — $14,019 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBUTLER HEALTH SYSTEM — $11,143 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetBREAKTHROUGH T1D — $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCLARK GILLIES FOUNDATION — $9,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetHERITAGE VALLEY HEALTH SYSTEM INC — $8,997 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPASSAVANT HOSPITAL FOUNDATION — $8,487 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetZIP WITH US INC — $6,066 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc — $5,000 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.

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.

The Pittsburgh FoundationPA28.3× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Pittsburgh Foundation · The United Way of Southwestern Pennsylvania · Upmc Group · Snee-Reinhardt Charitable Foundation · Staunton Farm Foundation 540-054 Dba Staunton Farm Foundation · M L Mason Mem Fund 12-26-35 · Pittsburgh Penguins Foundation · Pirates Charities · Community Foundation of Greater Johnstown · American Cancer Society Inc · The Ayco Charitable Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving 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 Mario Lemieux 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%1%3%6%10%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    6report 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, 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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Mario Lemieux Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Mario Lemieux Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 38 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph