· Public charity
The Livestrong Foundation
Since 1997, The Livestrong Foundation has served and supported over 14.2 million people affected by cancer through survivorship programs, publications and collaborative partnerships with community and grassroots organziations to ensure a high quality of life.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Texas One Fund | $37,602 |
| Regents of University of Michigan | $16,667 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY17–22, $793k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 98% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +37% since the first grant, against +25% for the ones you funded once.
9 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 31% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $38k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
National Council of YMCAs of the USA2× · 2017–2018 · $673k · revenue +51%- WWWonders & Worries Inc3× · 2020–2022 · $100k · revenue +43%
- VVITALHEARTS3× · 2020–2022 · $98k · revenue +60%
Funded once
- TBTHE BREAKFAST CLUB INCone grant, 2021 · $23k · revenue -18%
- HIHOPECAM INCgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $20k · revenue +60%
- SFSMITH FARM LTDone grant, 2020 · $20k · revenue -5%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Children's cancer fund champions kids in their fight against cancer through strategic investments in research and care in north texas.
To oversee, coordinate and support the Pediatric Oncology Programs at Boston Children's Hospital and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Inc.
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.
Wipe out kids cancer offers comfort and hope to kids with cancer through support programs serving the entire family and funds innovative research leading to new discoveries and treatments in the fight against pediatric cancer. "support and…
Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.
CanSup is a non-profit 501(c)3 organization dedicated to improving outcomes for cancer patients through unwavering, unbiased 1:1 support, leveraging our cutting edge technology platform. We are based in Texas but serve the entire United…
Beat childhood cancer drives childhood cancer research and raises awareness, making a difference in kids' survival today. our vision is to change the story for the next family by finding viable treatments and ultimately, cures for…
Break through cancer is a foundation dedicated to supporting translational research in the most difficult to treat cancers. our partner organizations are among the top cancer research centers and together, represent some of the most…
Children's cancer research fund fuels transformational research to bring better treatments and cures to children with cancer.
The mission of dfci is to provide expert, compassionate, and equitable care to children, adults, and their families, while advancing the understanding, diagnosis, treatment, cure, and prevention of cancer and related diseases. we train new…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Smith Farm Ltd and the most unlike its peers is Texas One Fund Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
19 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 19 of the 22 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds MOVEMBER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds National Council of YMCAs of the USA ↗
- Who funds PABLOVE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Wonders & Worries Inc ↗
- Who funds VITALHEARTS ↗
- Who funds Texas One Fund Inc ↗
- Who funds THE BREAKFAST CLUB INC ↗
- Who funds HOPECAM INC ↗
- Who funds SMITH FARM LTD ↗
- Who funds BIG LOVE CANCER CARE SERVICES ↗
- Who funds George Mark Childrens Fund ↗
- Who funds KIDS KICKING CANCER INC ↗
- Who funds THE CURE STARTS NOW INC ↗
- Who funds CANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY LOS ANGELES ↗
- Who funds PLANT POWERED METRO NEW YORK INC ↗
- Who funds I LIVE HERE I GIVE HERE ↗
- Who funds Emilio Nares Foundation ↗
- Who funds HENNEPIN HEALTH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CASTING FOR RECOVERY ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Central Texas Community Foundation · Austin Community Foundation Inc · Shell USA Company Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · American Endowment Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization The Livestrong Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Livestrong Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Livestrong 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.