Skip to content

· Private foundation

The George Schwab and Leona Lauder Foundation

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.

$67k
Granted FY2025still arriving
18
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$60k
Largest
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Health$406kAnimals$23kArts & Culture$11kReligion$7kInternational$3kEnvironment$1kPhilanthropy$1kFood & Nutrition$1kOther$0
02FY2025 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k17 grants · $7k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $60k
$300
Median grant
2
States reached
$428k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Biomedicinske centrum SAV$60,000
KQED$1,000
Animal Legal Defense Fund$1,000
The Marine Mammal Center$1,000
KALW$1,000
Oakland Animal Services$500
Canal Alliance$400
International Rescue Committee$400
Amnesty International$300
Planned Parenthood$200
Guide Dogs for the Blind$200
Wikipedia Foundation$200
Doctors Without Borders$200
Wildcare$200
KDFC$120
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.

US giving: 13% of grant dollars ($58k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 87% that went abroad ($400k) is mapped below.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY17–22, $700) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%World Food Program USA: $500 → 14%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $200 → 10%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

IL
NY
NV
IA
CA
VA
AZ
DC
AL
TX

Beyond the US: 87% of all-years giving ($400k)

2 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
Slovakia$290k · 5 grants
Afghanistan$110k · 2 grants
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

84%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$387k · 19 repeat orgs$71k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +63% since the first grant, against +37% for those funded once.

19 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
28

Total granted

$387k
$69k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+63%
+37%

Still filing today

63%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsHuman ServicesArts & CultureInternationalEducationReligionOther
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

  • TM
    THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER
    7× · 2017–2025 · $8k · revenue +63%
  • AL
    ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC
    7× · 2017–2025 · $7k · revenue +55%
  • CA
    CANAL ALLIANCE
    3× · 2020–2023 · $7k · revenue +80%

Funded once

  • SA
    Slovakia Academy of Sciences
    one grant, 2021 · $60k
  • U
    UCSF
    one grant, 2020 · $1k
  • IF
    Intersection for the Arts
    one grant, 2020 · $1k · revenue -23%
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
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
2
Wildaid Inc

Wildaid's mission is to inspire change and empower the world to protect wildlife and vital habitats from critical threats.

Animals
3
Food Forward Inc

Food forward fights hunger and prevents food waste by rescuing fresh surplus produce, connecting this abundance with people experiencing food insecurity, and inspiring others to do the same.

Food & Nutrition
4
Michigan Humane Society

To improve and save lives through compassionate care, community engagement and advocacy for animals.

Animals
5
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
6
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
7
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
8
Santa Barbara Humane Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

Santa barbara humane operates two campuses located in santa barbara and santa maria providing care for community-owned and homeless animals. both campuses offer affordable high quality veterinary care, compassionate behavior training…

Animals
9
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Foundation

To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.

Animals
10
Humane World for Animals International

HUMANE WORLD FOR ANIMALS INTERNATIONAL, FKA HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL (HSI), works around the globe to promote the human-animal bond, rescue and protect dogs and cats, improve farm animal welfare, protect wildlife, promote animal-free…

Animals
11
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals for Monterey County

The SPCA Monterey County's Mission is assuring compassionate treatment of all animals through rescue, rehabilitation, protection and education. The SPCA shelters homeless, neglected, and abused pets, including dogs, cats, horses, exotic…

Animals
12
United Animal Nations Dba Redrover

To bring animals out of crisis and strengthen the bond between people and animals through emergency sheltering, disaster relief services, financial assistance and education. redrover accomplishes its mission by engaging volunteers and…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wikimedia Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is International Rescue Committee 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

28 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. 28 of the 58 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
28/28
Grantees still filing
21/28
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Biomedicinske centrum SAV: $240,000 · OtherBiomedicinske centrum SAVInstitute of Virology: $100,000 · OtherInstitute of VirologySlovakia Academy of Sciences: $60,000 · OtherSlovakia Academy of Sciences+35 more: $20,875 · OtherTHE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $7,500 · AnimalsANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC: $7,400 · AnimalsMARIN HUMANE SOCIETY: $1,450 · AnimalsFRIENDS OF OAKLAND ANIMAL SERVICES: $1,300 · Animals+5 more: $1,200 · AnimalsCANAL ALLIANCE: $6,700 · Religion+1 more: $100 · ReligionKQED INC: $4,850 · Arts & CultureIntersection for the Arts: $1,000 · Arts & CultureMARIGOLD PROJECT INC: $300 · Arts & CultureUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $2,250 · EducationWIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION INC: $850 · EducationInternational Rescue Committee INC: $800 · InternationalGLOBALGIVING FOUNDATION INC: $500 · InternationalMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $200 · InternationalFRIENDS OF THE EARTH: $900 · Environment
Other$420,875Animals$18,850Religion$6,800Arts & Culture$6,150Education$3,100International$1,500Environment$900

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 budgetTHE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $7,500 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC: $7,400 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetCANAL ALLIANCE: $6,700 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetKQED INC: $4,850 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $2,250 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMARIN HUMANE SOCIETY: $1,450 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF OAKLAND ANIMAL SERVICES: $1,300 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetIntersection for the Arts: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE EARTH: $900 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION INC: $850 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $800 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGLOBALGIVING FOUNDATION INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE WORLD FOOD PROGRAM INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGREATER HOUSTON COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWILDCARE: $350 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSEA SHEPHERD CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFEEDING PETS OF THE HOMELESS AKA PETS OF THE HOMELESS: $300 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $300 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHUMANE FARMING ASSOCIATION: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SAN FRANCISCO SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO FOOD BANK: $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGUIDE DOGS FOR THE BLIND INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Orme School: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPEOPLE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS 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.

  • Who funds THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER ↗
  • Who funds ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds CANAL ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds KQED INC ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds MARIN HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF OAKLAND ANIMAL SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds Intersection for the Arts ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE EARTH ↗
  • Who funds WIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
  • Who funds GLOBALGIVING FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE WORLD FOOD PROGRAM INC ↗
  • Who funds GREATER HOUSTON COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds WILDCARE ↗
  • Who funds SEA SHEPHERD CONSERVATION SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds FEEDING PETS OF THE HOMELESS AKA PETS OF THE HOMELESS ↗
  • Who funds MARIGOLD PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
  • Who funds HUMANE FARMING ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗

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.

Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust IncIN11.3× affinity5 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 The George Schwab and Leona Lauder Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The George Schwab and Leona Lauder 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%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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 58 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 George Schwab and Leona Lauder’s filings →

    More from the funding graph