Skip to content
One Mission Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

One Mission Inc

One mission is a pediatric cancer charity dedicated to improving the lives of children and families from diagnosis, through treatment, and beyond.

$583k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$362k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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$5.3MPhilanthropy$30k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 7 grants below total $527,100, the rows itemized in this filing. The $583,229 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $56,129 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 · $165k
  • $250k+1 grant · $362k
$30,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$1.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BOSTON CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL$362,100
CAMP CASCO$40,000
RETT'S ROOST$30,000
HASBRO CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL$30,000
DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE$25,000
MASS GENERAL HOSPITAL$25,000
GRONK NATION YOUTH FOUNDATION$15,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY19–22, $157k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 36% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%CHRISTOPHER'S HAVEN: $100k → 8%CHRISTOPER'S HAVEN: $50k → 16%CHRISTOPHER'S HAVEN: $7k → 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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$5.6M · 8 repeat orgs$259k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
5

Total granted

$5.6M
$219k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+79%
+160%

Still filing today

100%
80%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $40k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’24’25
HealthHuman ServicesRecreation & SportsPhilanthropyCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • CH
    Children's Hospital Corporation
    9× · 2017–2025 · $3.4M · revenue +91%
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc
    9× · 2017–2025 · $1.4M · revenue +162%
  • Rhode Island Hospital
    9× · 2017–2025 · $218k · revenue +79%

Funded once

  • CO
    CHILDREN'S ONCOLOGY SERVICES OF MASSACHUSETTS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $75k · revenue +160%
  • MG
    MASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORATED
    one grant, 2019 · $52k
  • MG
    MASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORATEDgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $45k · revenue +91%
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
Dana-Farber Children's Hospital Cancer Care Inc

To oversee, coordinate and support the Pediatric Oncology Programs at Boston Children's Hospital and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Inc.

Health
2
Beth Israel Hospital & Children's Hospital Medical Care Corporation

Pediatric healthcare, education & research

—
3
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
4
New Hampshire Children's Health Foundation
Health
5
Children's Health Care

We champion the health needs of children and families. we are committed to improving children's health by providing the highest-quality, family centered care, advanced through research and education.

Health
6
MaineHealth

MaineHealth is a voluntary, not-for-profit community and referral system of hospitals, dedicated to providing high quality health care services to all persons who seek care regardless of their sex, race, religion, age, color, sexual…

Health
7
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
8
Hartford Hospital

To improve the health and healing of the people and communities we serve.

Health
9
Franciscan Hospital for Children

To create a compassionate and supportive environment where children with complex medical, mental health, and educational needs receive expert, specialized care. Our dedicated team is committed to excellence, innovation, and empowering…

Health
10
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Inc

Tertiary care academic medical center

Health
11
Ocean State Cancer Crushers
—
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Tufts Medical Center Group Return; the most unlike its peers is The New England Patriots Charitable Foundation 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

13 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. 13 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
10/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Children's Hospital Corporation: $3,405,002 · HealthChildren's Hospital CorporationDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: $1,361,644 · HealthDana-Farber Cancer Institute IncRhode Island Hospital: $218,460 · Health+5 more: $387,142 · Health+5 moreChristopher's Haven Inc: $157,215 · Human ServicesCamp Casco Inc: $142,074 · Recreation & SportsMASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORATED: $52,000 · OtherTUFTS MEDICAL CENTER GROUP RETURN: $40,000 · OtherMASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORATED: $25,000 · OtherThe New England Patriots Charitable Foundation Inc: $30,000 · PhilanthropyGOOD CAUSES INC: $15,000 · Community Improvement
Health$5,372,248Human Services$157,215Recreation & Sports$142,074Other$117,000Philanthropy$30,000Community Improvement$15,000

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 budgetChildren's Hospital Corporation: $3,405,002 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: $1,361,644 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetRhode Island Hospital: $218,460 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetJOE ANDRUZZI FOUNDATION INC: $157,791 over 2y, 4.9% of budgetChristopher's Haven Inc: $157,215 over 3y, 6.9% of budgetCamp Casco Inc: $142,074 over 5y, 7.2% of budgetRETT'S ROOST: $102,791 over 3y, 16% of budgetCHILDREN'S ONCOLOGY SERVICES OF MASSACHUSETTS INC: $75,160 over 1y, 9.8% of budgetTUFTS MEDICAL CENTER GROUP RETURN: $40,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe New England Patriots Charitable Foundation Inc: $30,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetCHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $6,500 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.

Golf Fights Cancer IncJoy In Childhood Foun…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Golf Fights Cancer IncMA13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Golf Fights Cancer Inc · Joy In Childhood Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 One Mission Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from One Mission Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 50%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 10%
  • Children's Hospital Corporation: 10% of income from government
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: 7% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get 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
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to One Mission Inc?

Find your warmest path to One Mission Inc 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 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 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 One Mission’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