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

· Public charity

The Ehe Foundation

To find treatments and a cure for the rare cancer, epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (ehe), by advancing research and driving collaboration between patients, researchers, and clinicians.

$105k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$17k
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, FY2019 to 2025.

Health$2.0MScience & Tech$314kSocial Science$33k
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $17,142, the rows itemized in this filing. The $104,810 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $87,668 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.
$17,142
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE CLEVELAND CLINIC$17,142
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 (FY19–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 95% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%BROAD INSTITUTE: $33k → 8%CELL CULTURE COMPANY: $34k → 7%THE BROAD INSTITUTE INC: $33k → 10%ALBANY MEDICAL COLLEGE MS-231: $490k → 14%WELL CORNELL MEDICAL COLLEGE: $13k → 17%THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA: $97k → 15%NATIONAL ORG FOR RARE DISORDERS: $10k → 9%UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO: $80k → 14%CORIELL INSTITUTE FOR MEDICAL RESEARCH: $15k → 12%THE BROAD INSTITUTE INC: $33k → 8%XCURES INC: $50k → 10%ALBANY MEDICAL COLLEGE: $40k → 14%MEMORIAL SLOAN KTTERING CANCER CENTER: $218k → 17%THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA: $37k → 15%ALBANY MEDICAL COLLEGE MS-231: $40k → 14%WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL COLLEGE: $10k → 17%ALBANY MEDICAL CENTER: $20k → 14%MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER: $460k → 17%MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER: $335k → 17%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

MN
IL
NY
MA
IA
OH
NJ
CT
CA

Grants abroad, by region: $77k on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Region not stated$77k · 100% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.0M · 5 repeat orgs$316k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +58% since the first grant, against +46% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
11

Total granted

$2.0M
$316k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+58%
+46%

Still filing today

60%
27%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthScience & 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

  • MEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER
    3× · 2019–2021 · $1.0M · revenue +82%
  • TC
    THE CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION GROUP RETURN
    4× · 2022–2025 · $258k · revenue +27%
  • TB
    The Broad Institute Inc
    2× · 2019–2021 · $66k · revenue +58%

Funded once

  • TB
    THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
    one grant, 2024 · $80k
  • XI
    XCURES INC
    one grant, 2024 · $50k
  • MC
    MAYO CLINIC
    one grant, 2020 · $41k
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 16 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)
6/6
Grantees still filing
5/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER: $1,012,500 · HealthMEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTERTHE CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION GROUP RETURN: $257,712 · HealthTHE CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION GROUP RETURNThe Broad Institute Inc: $66,160 · Health+1 more: $20,000 · HealthALBANY MED HEALTH SYSTEM: $570,000 · OtherALBANY MED HEALTH SYSTEMState University of Iowa: $134,200 · OtherState University of IowaTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS: $80,000 · OtherTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLI…XCURES INC: $50,000 · OtherMAYO CLINIC: $40,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $34,284 · OtherTHE BROAD INSTITUTE INC: $33,080 · Other+4 more: $42,500 · OtherCORIELL INSTITUTE FOR MEDICAL RESEARCH INC: $15,188 · Science & Tech
Health$1,356,372Other$984,564Science & Tech$15,188

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER: $1,012,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION GROUP RETURN: $257,712 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetThe Broad Institute Inc: $66,160 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetALBANY MED HEALTH SYSTEM: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCORIELL INSTITUTE FOR MEDICAL RESEARCH INC: $15,188 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR RARE DISORDERS INC: $10,000 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 MEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER ↗
  • Who funds THE CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION GROUP RETURN ↗
  • Who funds The Broad Institute Inc ↗
  • Who funds ALBANY MED HEALTH SYSTEM ↗
  • Who funds CORIELL INSTITUTE FOR MEDICAL RESEARCH INC ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR RARE DISORDERS INC ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 44%
  • Coriell Institute for Medical Research Inc: 44% of income from government
  • The Broad Institute Inc: 19% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get 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
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 Ehe Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Ehe 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 16 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 Ehe’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