Skip to content
The Lilabean Foundation Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

The Lilabean Foundation Inc

The organization was founded to help save the lives of the 5,000 children per year who are diagnosed with pediatric brain cancer.

$1.8M
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$845k
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 2025.

Health$4.9M
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
  • $250k+3 grants · $1.8M
$540,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$649k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHILDREN'S BRAIN TUMOR NETWORK$845,000
PNOC FOUNDATION$540,000
CHILDREN'S NATIONAL MEDICAL$409,000
PREP4GOLD$10,000
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 16%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 78% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%Childrens Brain Tumor Tissue Conso: $5k → 22%PNOC FOUNDATION: $540k → 8%Childrens National Medical Center: $490k → 14%PREP4GOLD: $10k → 6%Special Love: $8k → 7%Childrens National Hospital Founda: $432k → 8%CHILDREN'S BRAIN TUMOR NETWORK: $845k → 22%CHILDREN'S NATIONAL MEDICAL: $409k → 14%Childrens National Hospital Founda: $85k → 8%CHILDREN'S BRAIN TUMOR NETWORK: $520k → 22%CHILDREN'S NATIONAL MEDICAL: $313k → 14%Childrens Hospital of Philadelphia: $286k → 22%Childrens National Medical Center: $252k → 14%Childrens Brain Tumor Network: $258k → 22%THE BRAIN TUMOR INSTITUTE: $105k → 14%Childrens Hospital of Philadelphia: $50k → 22%Childrens Hospital Foundation: $40k → 14%Childrens National Research Center: $150k → 14%Childrens National Research Center: $142k → 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.
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.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$4.3M · 4 repeat orgs$598k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +95% since the first grant, against +80% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
2

Total granted

$4.3M
$48k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+95%
+80%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $550k 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
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

  • TC
    THE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA
    6× · 2019–2025 · $2.0M · revenue +59%
  • CN
    CHILDREN'S NATIONAL
    4× · 2022–2025 · $1.5M · revenue ×252 · 35% of their budget
  • CH
    CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION
    3× · 2017–2021 · $622k · revenue +95%

Funded once

  • CH
    CHILDREN'S HOSPITALgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $40k · revenue +62%
  • SL
    SPECIAL LOVE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $8k · revenue +80%
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
Children's Hospital & Research Center At Oakland

The mission of children's hospital & research center at oakland is to protect and advance the health and well-being of children through clinical care, teaching and research.

Health
2
Children's Research Institute

Children's research institute dba children's national research institute conducts and promotes translational and clinical medical research and education programs that lead to improved understanding, prevention, treatment, and care of…

Health
3
Children's Health Care

We champion the health needs of children and families. we are committed to improving children's health by providing the highest-quality, family centered care, advanced through research and education.

Health
4
Beth Israel Hospital & Children's Hospital Medical Care Corporation

Pediatric healthcare, education & research

—
5
Cook Children's Health Care System

Knowing that every child's life is sacred, our promise is to improve the health of every child in our region through the prevention and treatment of illness, disease and injury.

Health
6
Johns Hopkins All Children's Hospital Inc

Mission: johns hopkins all children's hospital (all children's), a member of johns hopkins medicine, strives to provide the highest quality care to improve the health of our entire community through innovation, collaboration, service…

Health
7
Children's Hospital Corporation

Provider of pediatric healthcare, education, research & community service

Health
8
Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh Foundation

Children's hospital of pittsburgh foundation is the sole fundraising arm of upmc children's hospital of pittsburgh.the foundation exists to provide financial support for the hospital's mission of improving the health and well-being of…

Health
9
Children's Physicians

Children's physicians delivers the highest quality pediatric primary care while supporting education and research.

Health
10
East Tennessee Children's Hospital Association Inc

East tennessee children's hospital is a free-standing, independent, not-for-profit pediatric health care system which serves the east tennessee region. children's hospital is certified by the state of tennessee as a comprehensive regional…

Health
11
Phoenix Children's Hospital Foundation

Phoenix children's hospital foundation supports phoenix children's hospital through fundraising ensuring that the hospital continues to stay on the leading edge of pediatric medicine and is equipped to fulfill its mission to advance hope,…

Health
12
Cook Children's Physician Network

Knowing that every child's life is sacred, our promise is to improve the health of every child in our region through the prevention and treatment of illness, disease, and injury.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Children's Hospital; the most unlike its peers is PREP4GOLD. 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

8 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
7/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA: $1,964,000 · HealthTHE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIACHILDREN'S NATIONAL: $1,463,378 · HealthCHILDREN'S NATIONALCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $622,475 · HealthCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATIONTHE PACIFIC PEDIATRIC NEURO-ONCOLOG CONSORTIUM FOUNDATION: $540,000 · HealthTHE PACIFIC PEDIATRIC NEURO-ONCOLOG CONSORTIUM FOUNDATION+3 more: $57,500 · HealthNATIONAL CHILD RESEARCH CENTER: $292,200 · Education
Health$4,647,353Education$292,200

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 CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA: $1,964,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetCHILDREN'S NATIONAL: $1,463,378 over 4y, 35% of budgetCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $622,475 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetTHE PACIFIC PEDIATRIC NEURO-ONCOLOG CONSORTIUM FOUNDATION: $540,000 over 1y, 22% of budgetNATIONAL CHILD RESEARCH CENTER: $292,200 over 2y, 3.2% of budgetCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL: $40,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSPECIAL LOVE INC: $7,500 over 1y, 0.7% 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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
National Philanthropic TrustPA9.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Lilabean Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Lilabean Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s 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.

    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 8 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 Lilabean’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