Skip to content
The Cart Fund Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

The Cart Fund Inc

Raise funds for alzheimers research

$1.3M
Granted FY2025still arriving
15
Grants FY2025still arriving
10
States reached
$125k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Health$4.4MEducation$1.9MScience & Tech$525kSocial Science$253kPublic Benefit$94kOther$0
02FY2025 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 15 grants below total $1,087,500, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,281,153 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $193,653 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.
$62,500
Median grant
10
States reached
$4.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BROWN UNIVERSITY$125,000
MASS GENERAL HOSPITAL RESEARCH$125,000
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN$75,000
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY$75,000
MASS GENERAL HOSPITAL$75,000
CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION$75,000
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA$62,500
COLD SPRING HARBOR LABORATORY$62,500
UCSF MAIN DEPOSITORY$62,500
UMASS CHAN MEDICAL SCHOOL$62,500
UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI$62,500
UNIVESITY OF KENTUCKY RESEARCH FOUN$62,500
CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIV$62,500
WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY$50,000
UNIVERSITY OF FL BOARD OF TRUSTEES$50,000
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 (FY21–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 81% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%MASS GENERAL HOSPITAL RESEARCH: $125k → 8%Mass General Hospital: $175k → 16%Stanford Univ Sch of Med: $125k → 8%Sanford Brunham Prebys: $125k → 11%Salk Inst for Bio Studies: $125k → 14%City of Hope Duarte CA: $47k → 14%COLD SPRING HARBOR LABORATORY: $63k → 7%USF Health Morsani Med Coll: $63k → 13%Mayo Clinic Jacksonville: $219k → 14%University of Miami: $63k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $75k → 14%Michigan State University: $75k → 16%University of South Alabama: $75k → 19%Washington Univ in St Louis: $150k → 11%WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $50k → 21%BROWN UNIVERSITY: $125k → 14%Georgia Tech Atlanta GA: $47k → 13%CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIV: $63k → 17%Marymount Univ Arlington VA: $63k → 7%Sanders Brown Univ of KY: $63k → 15%Mass General: $75k → 16%Stanford Univ Sch of Med: $125k → 8%Sanford Brunham Prebys: $63k → 11%Salk Institute California: $103k → 14%City of Hope Duarte CA: $47k → 14%Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory: $63k → 7%University of South Florida: $63k → 13%Mayo Clinic Jacksonville: $109k → 14%Univ of Michigan Med School: $75k → 14%MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY: $75k → 16%Washington Univ in St Louis: $63k → 11%Georgia Tech Atlanta GA: $47k → 13%Mass General: $75k → 16%Stanford Univ Sch of Med: $63k → 8%Salk Inst for Bio Studies: $75k → 14%Mayo Clinic Jacksonville: $63k → 14%University of Michigan: $75k → 14%Washington Univ: $50k → 11%Mass Inst Charleston MA: $94k → 16%Salk Institute California: $75k → 14%Mayo Clinic Jacksonville: $63k → 14%University of Michigan: $75k → 14%Washington Univ in St Louis: $50k → 11%Mass Inst Charleston MA: $47k → 16%Salk Institute California: $75k → 14%Washington Univ: $50k → 11%Salk Inst for Bio Studies: $63k → 14%Washington Univ: $50k → 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
MI
NY
MA
OH
PA
RI
CA
MO
KY
VA
AZ
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.

77%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$5.9M · 34 repeat orgs$1.8M to everyone else

34 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 27 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

34
32

Total granted

$5.9M
$1.3M

Still filing today

12%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 48% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $500k 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
EducationScience & TechOther
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

  • WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY
    5× · 2021–2025 · $488k · revenue +21%
  • UO
    University of Michigan
    3× · 2022–2025 · $225k · revenue +92%
  • UO
    University of Miami
    2× · 2024–2025 · $125k · revenue +9%

Funded once

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH ALABAMA
    one grant, 2024 · $75k
  • UO
    Univ of Michigan Med School
    one grant, 2024 · $75k
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
    one grant, 2019 · $63k
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
04the grantee network

6 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. 6 of the 74 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/6
Grantees still filing
3/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Mayo Clinic Jacksonville: $500,000 · OtherMayo Clinic JacksonvilleUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON: $333,216 · OtherStanford Univ Sch of Med: $312,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $309,375 · OtherSalk Inst for Bio Studies: $262,500 · OtherSalk Institute California: $253,125 · OtherMass General Hospital: $250,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA: $237,500 · Other+61 more: $4,393,701 · Other+61 moreWASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $487,500 · EducationWASHINGTO…University of Miami: $125,000 · EducationUniversit…CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY: $62,500 · EducationCASE WEST…COLD SPRING HARBOR LABORATORY: $125,000 · Science & TechBROWN UNIVERSITY: $125,000 · Community Improvement
Other$6,851,917Education$675,000Science & Tech$125,000Community Improvement$125,000

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 budgetWASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $487,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Michigan: $225,000 over 3y, 23% of budgetCOLD SPRING HARBOR LABORATORY: $125,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBROWN UNIVERSITY: $125,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Miami: $125,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY: $62,500 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.

  • Who funds WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds University of Michigan ↗
  • Who funds COLD SPRING HARBOR LABORATORY ↗
  • Who funds BROWN UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds University of Miami ↗
  • Who funds CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The Cart Fund Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Cart Fund Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 5%
  • University of Miami: 5% 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.

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 74 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 Cart’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