· Private foundation
Paula and Rodger Riney Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k3 grants · $4k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
- $250k+10 grants · $33M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE | $12,000,000 |
| CENTRE HOSPITALIER UNIVERSITAIRE DE TOULOUSE | $5,150,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI | $4,110,826 |
| INTERNATIONAL MYELOMA SOCIETY | $3,139,644 |
| MAYO CLINIC | $2,019,000 |
| ST LOUIS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $2,000,000 |
| MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL | $1,372,800 |
| BIOSTL | $1,125,000 |
| NEW YORK UNIVERSITY | $1,027,781 |
| PURDUE UNIVERSITY | $694,561 |
| AMERICAN LEGION POST 156 | $25,000 |
| ASSISTANCE LEAGUE ST LOUIS | $1,650 |
| KIRKWOOD BAPTIST CHURCH | $1,000 |
| 100 NEEDIEST CASES STL | $1,000 |
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.
Your US giving — 80% of grant dollars ($110M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 20% that went abroad ($27M) is mapped below.
Your human-services grants (FY18–24, $29k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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
Beyond the US — 20% of all-years giving ($27M)
4 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
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 +56% since the first grant, against +13% for the ones you funded once.
11 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 66% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10M 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
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc6× · 2019–2024 · $55M · revenue +75%- IMINTERNATIONAL MYELOMA SOCIETY4× · 2021–2024 · $13M · revenue +164% · 90% of their budget
- TMTHE MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN INC2× · 2022–2023 · $6.0M · revenue +9%
Funded once
- IINSERMone grant, 2021 · $5.2M
- UOUNIVERSITY OF WURZBURGone grant, 2023 · $5.1M
THE MULTIPLE MYELOMA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2019 · $5.0M · revenue -34%
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.
Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.
The GI Research Foundation works to treat, prevent, and cure digestive diseases. In collaboration with the physicians and scientists at the University of Chicago Digestive Diseases Center, we fund innovative clinical and laboratory…
To improve the lives of people through innovative scientific and engineering research.
City of Hope's mission is to make hope a reality for all touched by cancer and diabetes. PLEASE SEE SCHEDULE O FOR A CONTINUATION OF OUR MISSION
Uchicago medicine network, inc. supports and encourages health and human service by providing support, directly or indirectly to ingalls memorial hospital, the university of chicago medical center, and other related tax-exempt…
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…
The corporation is organized and is operated exclusively for charitable, educational and scientific purposes. all children's research institute supports, encourages, and engages in and conducts medical research and other research in…
City of Hope National Medical Center's mission is to make hope a reality for all touched by cancer and diabetes. PLEASE SEE SCHEDULE O FOR A CONTINUATION OF OUR MISSION
The samuel waxman cancer research foundation (the "foundation") funds innovative research to bring faster cures to patients. in addition to supporting ongoing collaborative research in specific cancers, our scientists are investigating the…
Umms provides a variety of inpatient/outpatient services to people in the maryland area regardless of their ability to pay. revenues are used to help defray the costs of services.
Arbor research collaborative for health is committed to improving patient care through research that shapes medical policies and practice. in particular, arbor research conducts health outcomes research on chronic disease and end-stage…
Fred hutch cancer center ("fred hutch") unites innovative research and compassionate care to prevent and eliminate cancer and infectious disease. continued on schedule o
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The St Louis Men's Group Against Cancer and the most unlike its peers is Missouri K9 Friends. 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.
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 34 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 11% 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.
31 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. 31 of the 55 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 Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL MYELOMA SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds THE MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN INC ↗
- Who funds THE MULTIPLE MYELOMA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds BIOSTL ↗
- Who funds MAYO CLINIC ↗
- Who funds New York University ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF GREATER ST LOUIS INC ↗
- Who funds CONCORDANCE ↗
- Who funds CMT Research Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds CIRCLE OF CONCERN ↗
- Who funds HealthTree Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds THE SHRINERS' HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN ↗
- Who funds ENTREPRENEUR STARTUP BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds CARE AND COUNSELING INC ↗
- Who funds BURNS RECOVERED SUPPORT GROUP INC ↗
- Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
- Who funds OPERATION FOOD SEARCH INC ↗
- Who funds GREATER SAINT LOUIS HONOR FLIGHT INC ↗
- Who funds MUSEUM OF AMERICAN FINANCE ↗
- Who funds ST LOUIS COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION ↗
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: St Louis Community Foundation Inc · World Wide Technology Foundation · Moneta Group Charitable Foundation · St Louis Community Foundation · Edward Jones Foundation · Centene Foundation · United Way of Greater St Louis Inc · Employees Community Fund of the Boeing Company · The Crawford Taylor Foundation · Bjc Health System Dba Bjc Healthcare · Enterprise Bank & Trust Foundation · Edward Jones Foundation
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 Paula and Rodger Riney 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.
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — 7% of income from government
- The Shriners' Hospital for Children — 6% of income from government
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.