Skip to content
The International Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia Foundation Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

The International Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia Foundation Inc

Mission objectives: (a) offer support and encouragement to the waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia community and others with an interest in the disease, (b) to provide information and educational programs that address patients and caregivers' concerns and (c) to provide and support research leading to better treatments and ultimately a cure.

$2.9M
Granted FY2024still arriving
6
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$1.3M
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 2024.

Health$8.8MEducation$940kScience & Tech$550k
02FY2024 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 6 grants below total $2,143,879, the rows itemized in this filing. The $2,887,764 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $743,885 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.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $60k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $80k
  • $250k+3 grants · $2.0M
$320,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$7.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE$1,262,440
MAYO CLINIC$421,489
NYU SCHOOL OF MEDICINE$320,000
THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY$79,950
MEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER$30,000
UNIVERSITY OF CA SAN DIEGO$30,000
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 68% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE: $661k → 16%MAYO CLINIC: $375k → 9%UNIVERSITY OF CA SAN DIEGO: $30k → 11%THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CA LA: $180k → 14%MEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER: $30k → 17%BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE: $180k → 16%WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $130k → 21%EMORY UNIVERSITY: $60k → 14%THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $160k → 15%THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE: $180k → 9%DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE: $603k → 16%MAYO CLINIC: $346k → 9%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO: $30k → 11%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES: $90k → 14%BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE: $90k → 16%WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $10k → 21%EMORY UNIVERSITY: $2 → 14%THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $80k → 15%THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE: $90k → 9%DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE: $511k → 16%MAYO CLINIC: $255k → 9%UNIVERSITY OF CA SAN DIEGO: $30k → 11%THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CA LA: $90k → 14%BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE: $90k → 16%THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $80k → 15%THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE: $90k → 9%DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE: $495k → 16%MAYO CLINIC: $215k → 9%THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES: $40k → 14%BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE: $20k → 16%THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $80k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE: $40k → 9%DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE: $333k → 16%MAYO FOUNDATION FOR MEDICAL RESEARCH: $210k → 9%BECKMAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF THE CITY OF HOPE: $180k → 14%BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE: $20k → 16%DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE: $327k → 16%MAYO CLINIC: $172k → 9%BECKMAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF THE CITY OF HOPE: $90k → 14%MAYO CLINIC: $135k → 9%BECKMAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF THE CITY OF HOPE: $60k → 14%BECKMAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF THE CITY OF HOPE: $40k → 14%BECKMAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF THE CITY OF HOPE: $30k → 14%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

NH
MN
NY
MA
OH
CT
CA
MO
GA
TX

Grants abroad, by region: $744k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 2 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$712k · 96% · 10 grants

Stated purpose: RESEARCH

North America (Canada and Mexico)$32k · 4% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: RESEARCH

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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$7.6M · 11 repeat orgs$250k to everyone else

11 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
2

Total granted

$7.6M
$220k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+47%
+75%

Still filing today

55%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $30k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthEducationOther
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

  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc
    2× · 2023–2024 · $2.0M · revenue +16%
  • NY
    New York University
    2× · 2023–2024 · $400k · revenue +11%
  • BC
    Baylor College of Medicine
    5× · 2019–2023 · $400k · revenue +47%

Funded once

  • YN
    YALE NEW HAVEN HOSPITALgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $180k · revenue +75%
  • RO
    REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
    one grant, 2021 · $40k
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
The Johns Hopkins Hospital

For more than 125 years, the mission of the johns hopkins hospital has been to lead the world in the diagnosis and treatment of disease and to train tomorrow's great physicians, nurses and scientists. above all, we aim to provide the…

Health
2
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
3
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

Fred hutch cancer center ("fred hutch") unites innovative research and compassionate care to prevent and eliminate cancer and infectious disease. continued on schedule o

Health
4
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.

Health
5
Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute

Sanford burnham prebys medical discovery institute's mission is to advance the biomedical sciences by cultivating the next generation of scientific leaders, providing meaningful opportunities for researchers of all backgrounds to learn,…

Health
6
Truman Medical Center Incorporated

University health is an academic health center providing accessible, state-of-the-art quality healthcare to our community regardless of the ability to pay.

Health
7
City of Hope National Medical Center

To make hope a reality for all touched by cancer and diabetes. please see schedule o for a continuation of our mission.

Health
8
University of Chicago Medical Center

Our mission at the university of chicago medicine is to provide superior health care through rigorous research, innovative education, and comprehensive care and healing. in partnership with our colleagues, we pursue life-changing…

Health
9
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center

As a leading academic healthcare organization, our mission is to elevate the health status of the communities we serve.(see schedule o for continuation)(continued)-we deliver exceptional healthcare enhanced by research and education-we…

Health
10
Massachusetts Eye & Ear Infirmary

THE MASSACHUSETTS EYE AND EAR INFIRMARY ("THE INFIRMARY") IS A NOT-FOR-PROFIT TEACHING HOSPITAL CONDUCTING PATIENT CARE AND RESEARCH. THE INFIRMARY IS A TEACHING HOSPITAL OF HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL AND AN INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR RESEARCH.…

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
New York Genome Center Inc

Operate a state-of-the-art, world-class genomic research center that creates and uses advanced genomics to understand the genetic basis of disease. for more information, see schedule o.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is City of Hope; the most unlike its peers is Dana-Farber Cancer Institute 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

9 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. 9 of the 15 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)
9/9
Grantees still filing
7/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MAYO CLINIC: $2,517,445 · HealthMAYO CLINICDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: $1,992,607 · HealthDana-Farber Cancer Institute IncCITY OF HOPE: $400,000 · HealthCITY OF HOPEYALE NEW HAVEN HOSPITAL: $180,000 · Health+1 more: $30,000 · HealthDANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE: $2,929,546 · OtherDANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTEUNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF NEW HAMPSHIRE: $400,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF NEW HAMPSHIRETHE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $399,950 · OtherTHE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITYREGENTS UNIV OF CALIFORNIA: $360,000 · OtherREGENTS UNIV OF CALIFORNIA+2 more: $130,000 · OtherNew York University: $400,000 · EducationNew York U…Baylor College of Medicine: $400,000 · EducationBaylor Col…WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $140,082 · EducationWASHINGTON…Emory University: $60,002 · EducationEmory Univ…
Health$5,120,052Other$4,219,496Education$1,000,084

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

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMAYO CLINIC: $2,517,445 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: $1,992,607 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNew York University: $400,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBaylor College of Medicine: $400,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetCITY OF HOPE: $400,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetYALE NEW HAVEN HOSPITAL: $180,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $140,082 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetEmory University: $60,002 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER: $30,000 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 MAYO CLINIC ↗
  • Who funds Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc ↗
  • Who funds New York University ↗
  • Who funds Baylor College of Medicine ↗
  • Who funds CITY OF HOPE ↗
  • Who funds YALE NEW HAVEN HOSPITAL ↗
  • Who funds WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds Emory University ↗
  • Who funds MEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The International Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The International Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia Foundation Inc. 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%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: 7% of income from government
  • Yale New Haven Hospital: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
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 15 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on International Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia’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