Skip to content
The Canary Fund Dba Canary Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

The Canary Fund Dba Canary Foundation

Canary Foundation is a public charity exempt from U.S.

$1.8M
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$450k
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$5.4MScience & Tech$2.8MEducation$249k
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $89k
  • $50k–250k7 grants · $856k
  • $250k+2 grants · $803k
$118,258
Median grant
6
States reached
$2.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UC San Diego Foundation$450,000
University of Pennsylvania$353,394
Stanford School Of Medicine$209,000
University of Michigan$203,950
Providence Swedish Cancer Ins$174,400
University of Washington$118,258
Seattle Inst Biomedical Clinical$50,000
University of Texas Health Ct$50,000
Urology of Virginia$50,000
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical$42,000
Stanford University Fdtn$35,067
UCSF Foundation$12,000
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 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 65% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Beth Israel Deaconess Medical: $101k → 16%University of Pennsylvania: $353k → 22%Stanford School Of Medicine: $209k → 8%UC San Diego Foundation: $450k → 11%University of Texas: $53k → 14%University of Texas Health Ct: $55k → 16%Van Andel Institute: $579k → 11%University of Michigan: $204k → 16%Stanford University Fdtn: $2.8M → 14%American Cancer Society: $45k → 13%Emory University: $32k → 14%University of Washington: $704k → 9%Urology of Virginia: $65k → 10%Beth Israel Deaconess Medical: $62k → 16%University of Pennsylvania: $229k → 22%Stanford School Of Medicine: $159k → 8%UC San Diego Foundation: $200k → 11%University of Texas Health Ct: $50k → 16%Van Andel Institute: $495k → 11%University of Michigan: $33k → 16%Stanford University Fdtn: $35k → 14%University of Washington: $563k → 9%Urology of Virginia: $56k → 10%Beth Israel Deaconess Medical: $50k → 16%Stanford School Of Medicine: $106k → 8%University of Texas Health Ct: $40k → 16%University of Michigan: $32k → 16%University of Washington: $470k → 9%Urology of Virginia: $50k → 10%Beth Israel Deaconess Medical: $42k → 16%University of Texas Health Ct: $32k → 16%University of Michigan: $23k → 16%University of Washington: $196k → 9%Urology of Virginia: $40k → 10%Beth Israel Deaconess Medical: $40k → 16%Cambridge Canary Ctr Stanford: $198k → 8%University of Washington: $118k → 9%Urology of Virginia: $32k → 10%Stanford University: $127k → 8%Stanford School Of Medicine: $75k → 8%Seattle Inst Biomedical Clinical: $60k → 9%Stanford School Of Medicine: $32k → 8%Seattle Inst Biomedical Clinical: $50k → 9%Stanford University: $28k → 8%Seattle Inst Biomedical Clinical: $37k → 9%Seattle Inst Biomedical Clinical: $30k → 9%Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research: $30k → 9%Providence Swedish Cancer Ins: $174k → 9%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
MI
MA
PA
CA
VA
GA
TX
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.
$9.2M · 10 repeat orgs$366k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +28% since the first grant, against +15% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
5

Total granted

$9.2M
$192k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+28%
+15%

Still filing today

80%
20%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $174k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthEducationPhilanthropyOther
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

  • SH
    STANFORD HEALTH CARE
    7× · 2017–2025 · $3.8M · revenue +96%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION
    6× · 2017–2025 · $2.1M · revenue +46%
  • VA
    VAN ANDEL INSTITUTE
    2× · 2020–2021 · $1.1M · revenue +25%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $65k
  • AC
    AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC
    one grant, 2017 · $45k
  • EU
    Emory University
    one grant, 2022 · $32k · revenue +15%
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
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
2
The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University

Stanford university is one of a select group of american universities that have achieved eminence in both undergraduate and graduate education and research - cont'd sch o.

Education
3
Southern California University of Health Sciences

The mission of southern california university of health sciences (scu) is to educate students as competent, caring and successful practitioners of integrative healthcare. the university is committed to providing excellence in academics,…

Education
4
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
5
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
6
Washington University

The washington university is a co-educational, nondenominational university with a long and distinguished history of teaching, research and (cont'd on schedule o)

Education
7
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education
8
Drexel University

Drexel university fulfills its founder's vision of preparing each new generation of students for productive professional and civic lives while also focusing its collective expertise on solving society's greatest problems. drexel is an…

Education
9
University of Miami

See Form 990, Part I, Line 1, Description of Organization Mission.

Education
10
Stony Brook Urology University Faculty Practice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
11
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
12
Cornell University

Education, research, medical services and other public services.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of California San Francisco Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Schellhammer Urological Research Foundation. 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 17 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)
11/13
Grantees still filing
10/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

STANFORD HEALTH CARE: $3,767,259 · HealthSTANFORD HEALTH CAREBETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER INC: $314,015 · HealthBETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER INCSEATTLE INSTITUTE FOR BIOMEDICAL AND CLINICAL RESEARCH: $186,924 · HealthSWEDISH HEALTH SERVICES: $174,400 · HealthUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION: $2,070,878 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATIONUC SAN DIEGO FOUNDATION: $650,000 · EducationUC SAN DIEGO FOUNDATIONTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $582,512 · EducationTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANI…UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $325,352 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FO…+1 more: $31,500 · EducationVAN ANDEL INSTITUTE: $1,074,128 · PhilanthropyVAN ANDEL INST…UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS FOUNDATION INC: $246,832 · PhilanthropyUNIVERSITY OF …MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW: $322,877 · OtherSCHELLHAMMER UROLOGICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $192,663 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $65,435 · OtherAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $45,384 · OtherFRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CTR: $29,754 · Other+1 more: $20,000 · Other
Health$4,442,598Education$3,660,242Philanthropy$1,320,960Other$676,113

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 budgetSTANFORD HEALTH CARE: $3,767,259 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION: $2,070,878 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetVAN ANDEL INSTITUTE: $1,074,128 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetUC SAN DIEGO FOUNDATION: $650,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $582,512 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $325,352 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetMICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW: $322,877 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetBETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER INC: $314,015 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS FOUNDATION INC: $246,832 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetSCHELLHAMMER UROLOGICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $192,663 over 5y, 19% of budgetSEATTLE INSTITUTE FOR BIOMEDICAL AND CLINICAL RESEARCH: $186,924 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetEmory University: $31,500 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Donor Advised Charita…
Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO5.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 The Canary Fund Dba Canary Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Canary Fund Dba Canary Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 6%
  • Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Inc: 6% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to The Canary Fund Dba Canary Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Canary Fund Dba Canary 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 17 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 Canary Fund Dba Canary’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