Skip to content
Nmdp Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Nmdp Foundation

Raises funds to support the national marrow donor program (nmdp) mission: we save lives through cell therapy.

$11M
Granted FY2025still arriving
19
Grants FY2025still arriving
10
States reached
$1.1M
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.

Health$33MEducation$1.1MScience & Tech$658kCommunity Improvement$36k
02FY2025 · 19 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 19 grants below total $4,373,331, the rows itemized in this filing. The $10,856,699 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $6,483,368 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k6 grants · $196k
  • $50k–250k9 grants · $986k
  • $250k+4 grants · $3.2M
$80,000
Median grant
10
States reached
$22M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM$1,105,370
NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM$773,415
NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM$756,655
NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM$555,805
NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM$232,384
FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER$200,000
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER$93,333
JULIE ROGERS GIFT OF LIFE PROGRAM$82,740
LIFESHARE BLOOD CENTERS$82,740
UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH$80,000
INDIANA UNIVERSITY$80,000
STANFORD UNIVERSITY$80,000
NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM$54,600
UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM$40,000
MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER RESEARCH CENTER$40,000
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 8% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $2.7M → 11%Gift Of Life: $500k → 11%WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY OF ST LOUIS: $150k → 21%FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER: $276k → 9%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $2.3M → 11%FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER: $240k → 9%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $2.0M → 11%FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER: $200k → 9%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $1.6M → 11%FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER: $194k → 9%National Marrow Donor Program: $1.6M → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $1.5M → 11%National Marrow Donor Program: $1.2M → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $1.1M → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $1.1M → 11%National Marrow Donor Program: $1.1M → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $1.1M → 11%National Marrow Donor Program: $943k → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $835k → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $773k → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $757k → 11%National Marrow Donor Program: $750k → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $692k → 11%National Marrow Donor Program: $677k → 11%National Marrow Donor Program: $648k → 11%National Marrow Donor Program: $616k → 11%national marrow donor program: $594k → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $556k → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $552k → 11%National Marrow Donor Program: $526k → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $497k → 11%National Marrow Donor Program: $485k → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $465k → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $463k → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $429k → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $405k → 11%National Marrow Donor Program: $397k → 11%National Marrow Donor Program: $351k → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $316k → 11%National Marrow Donor Program: $291k → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $264k → 11%National Marrow Donor Program: $261k → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $255k → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $232k → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $184k → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $148k → 11%National Marrow Donor Program: $147k → 11%NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $131k → 11%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

WA
MN
NY
MA
IN
PA
CA
CO
MO
MD
LA
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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$38M · 17 repeat orgs$855k to everyone else

17 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
9

Total granted

$38M
$790k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+69%
+78%

Still filing today

65%
78%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $65k 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
HealthEducationHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • NM
    NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM
    9× · 2017–2025 · $32M · revenue +90%
  • MEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER
    7× · 2019–2025 · $538k · revenue +82%
  • SL
    ST LOUIS UNIVERSITY
    6× · 2019–2024 · $538k · revenue +9%

Funded once

  • GO
    GIFT OF LIFE MARROW REGISTRY INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $500k · revenue +122%
  • CN
    CHILDREN'S NATIONALgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $68k · revenue +328%
  • HL
    H LEE MOFFITT CANCER CENTER AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE HOSPITAL INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $36k · revenue +51%
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
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

Fred hutch cancer center ("fred hutch") unites innovative research and compassionate care to prevent and eliminate cancer and infectious disease. continued on schedule o

Health
2
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.

Health
3
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
4
Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute

Sanford burnham prebys medical discovery institute's mission is to advance the biomedical sciences by cultivating the next generation of scientific leaders, providing meaningful opportunities for researchers of all backgrounds to learn,…

Health
5
University of Minnesota Physicians

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…

Health
6
Children's Hospital & Research Center At Oakland

The mission of children's hospital & research center at oakland is to protect and advance the health and well-being of children through clinical care, teaching and research.

Health
7
Rush University Medical Center

The mission of Rush is to improve the health of the individuals and diverse communities we serve through the integration of outstanding patient care, education, research and community partnerships.

Health
8
University of Chicago Medical Center

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…

Health
9
New York University

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.

Education
10
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
11
Texas Children's Hospital

Texas children's hospital, headquartered in houston, texas, is a not-for-profit organization whose mission is to create a healthier future for children and women throughout our global community by leading in patient care, education and…

Health
12
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center

As a leading academic healthcare organization, our mission is to elevate the health status of the communities we serve.(see schedule o for continuation)(continued)-we deliver exceptional healthcare enhanced by research and education-we…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is H Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute Inc; the most unlike its peers is Julie Rogers Gift of Life Program. 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

21 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. 21 of the 29 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/21
Grantees still filing
17/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $32,397,286 · HealthNATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM+11 more: $2,186,562 · Health+11 moreFRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER: $1,326,000 · OtherUTMD ANDERSON: $483,333 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL: $440,000 · OtherIndiana University School of Medicine: $280,000 · OtherMASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORATED: $200,000 · OtherLIFESHARE BLOOD CENTER: $144,273 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO: $138,000 · Other+3 more: $85,350 · OtherST LOUIS UNIVERSITY: $538,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH: $325,999 · EducationBaylor College of Medicine: $286,000 · EducationTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $200,000 · Education+2 more: $71,000 · EducationLTSC COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $35,612 · Housing & Shelter
Health$34,583,848Other$3,096,956Education$1,420,999Housing & Shelter$35,612

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM: $32,397,286 over 9y, 1.2% of budgetFRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER: $1,326,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetMEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER: $538,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetST LOUIS UNIVERSITY: $538,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetGIFT OF LIFE MARROW REGISTRY INC: $500,000 over 1y, 3.5% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA HEALTH SERVICES FOUNDATION PC: $360,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH: $325,999 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetBaylor College of Medicine: $286,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: $211,289 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetChildren's Hospital Corporation: $200,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $200,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLIFESHARE BLOOD CENTER: $144,273 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetJulie Rogers Gift of Life Program: $144,273 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetCHILDREN'S RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $70,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCHILDREN'S NATIONAL: $68,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetH LEE MOFFITT CANCER CENTER AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE HOSPITAL INC: $36,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION: $36,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLTSC COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $35,612 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $35,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetH LEE MOFFITT CANCER CENTER AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE INC: $34,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA: $25,000 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

American Cancer Socie…
American Cancer Society IncGA13.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Cancer Society Inc

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • Children's Hospital Corporation: 10% of income from government
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: 7% of income from government
  • H Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute Hospital Inc: 3% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
3report 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 29 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 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 Nmdp’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