Skip to content
Regenstrief Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Regenstrief Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$8.2M
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$6.7M
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 2025.

Health$52MEducation$25MEnvironment$10kHuman Services$6kArts & Culture$5kPhilanthropy$5kAnimals$1kReligion$100
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $10k
  • $250k+2 grants · $8.2M
$1,410,578
Median grant
1
States reached
$142M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
REGENSTRIEF INSTITUTE INC$6,749,046
ESKENAZI HEALTH FOUNDATION$1,410,578
DOVE RECOVERY HOUSE$5,000
AM SPEECH-LANG GRANT$5,000
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 (FY23–23, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%Heart Change Ministries: $1k → 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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$76M · 4 repeat orgs$47k to everyone else

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
11

Total granted

$76M
$37k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+21%
+46%

Still filing today

75%
73%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
EducationArts & CulturePhilanthropyHealthEnvironmentCivil RightsOther
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

  • RI
    Regenstrief Institute Inc
    9× · 2017–2025 · $49M · revenue +21% · 34% of their budget
  • Indiana University Foundation
    6× · 2017–2023 · $15M · revenue +97%
  • TO
    TRUSTEES OF PURDUE UNIVERSITY
    5× · 2018–2022 · $10M

Funded once

  • CI
    CENTRAL INDIANA LAND TRUST INCORPORATED
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +14%
  • MU
    Marian Universitygraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $5k · revenue +46%
  • TC
    The Children's Museum of Indianapolis Incgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +96%
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
Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc

Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…

Community Improvement
2
Indiana University Alumni Association Inc

The indiana university alumni association activates and supports the global alumni network- encouraging alumni to grow a lifelong connection with indiana university, and inspiring their ongoing generosity toward each other and the…

—
3
University of Indianapolis

The University of Indianapolis champions lifelong learning through relevant and innovative education that fosters experiential learning, diverse perspectives, service for impact, and a global mindset.

Education
4
University Family Physicians Inc

Engage actively and continuously in medical research, education and training in the practice of medicine in conjunction with the department of family medicine of the indiana university school of medicine and indiana university…

—
5
Indiana University Health Care Associates Inc

To deliver preeminent medical care and service to our patients and communities through outstanding and innovative medical leadership and practice, while participating in and supporting excellence in education and research. We achieve this…

Health
6
Indiana University Health Foundation Inc

Indiana university health foundation leverages the power of philanthropy to support the iu health goal of making indiana one of the healthiest states in the nation.

Health
7
Indiana University Health Inc

Lead the transformation of healthcare through quality, innovation & education, and make Indiana one of the nation's healthiest states.

Health
8
The Indianapolis Foundation Inc

To mobilize people, ideas, and investments to make this a community where all individuals have equitable opportunity to reach their full potential - no matter place, race or identity.

Community Improvement
9
Indiana Institute of Technology Inc

Indiana tech is a private, independent, and non-denominational university. students are prepared for active participation in the complex, global society of the 21st century and are motivated toward a life of significance and worth. about…

Education
10
Indiana University Health West Hospital Inc

Lead the transformation of healthcare through quality, innovation & education, and make Indiana one of the nation's healthiest states.

Health
11
Union Health System

To serve our communities by provding innovative and compassionate healthcare.

Health
12
Indiana University Health Frankfort Inc

Lead the transformation of healthcare through quality, innovation & education, and make Indiana one of the nation's healthiest states.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Central Indiana Community Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Heart Change Ministries 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

12 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. 12 of the 18 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
8/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Regenstrief Institute Inc: $49,415,222 · EducationRegenstrief Institute IncIndiana University Foundation: $14,500,000 · EducationIndiana University Foundation+2 more: $5,100 · EducationTRUSTEES OF PURDUE UNIVERSITY: $10,000,000 · OtherTRUSTEES OF PU…+6 more: $21,100 · OtherEskenazi Health Foundation Inc: $2,409,490 · HealthCENTRAL INDIANA LAND TRUST INCORPORATED: $10,000 · EnvironmentCentral Indiana Community Foundation Inc: $5,000 · PhilanthropyJames Whitcomb Riley Memorial Association: $250 · PhilanthropyThe Children's Museum of Indianapolis Inc: $5,000 · Arts & CultureTHE IMMIGRANT WELCOME CENTER INC: $5,000 · Civil RightsHEART CHANGE MINISTRIES INC: $1,000 · Human Services
Education$63,920,322Other$10,021,100Health$2,409,490Environment$10,000Philanthropy$5,250Arts & Culture$5,000Civil Rights$5,000Human Services$1,000

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 budgetRegenstrief Institute Inc: $49,415,222 over 9y, 34% of budgetIndiana University Foundation: $14,500,000 over 6y, 1.3% of budgetEskenazi Health Foundation Inc: $2,409,490 over 2y, 4.4% of budgetCENTRAL INDIANA LAND TRUST INCORPORATED: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCentral Indiana Community Foundation Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMarian University: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Children's Museum of Indianapolis Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetALLIANCE FOR AGING RESEARCH: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE IMMIGRANT WELCOME CENTER INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetHEART CHANGE MINISTRIES INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetJames Whitcomb Riley Memorial Association: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY HIGH SCHOOL OF INDIANA INC: $100 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.

The Indianapolis Foun…Central Indiana Commu…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Indianapolis Foundation IncIN13.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Indianapolis Foundation Inc · Central Indiana Community Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Regenstrief Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Regenstrief Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    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 18 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-PF 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 Regenstrief’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