Skip to content
The October Saves Goalie Challenge at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

The October Saves Goalie Challenge

Our all-volunteer non-profit organization turns stopped pucks into powerful life-saving weapons through fundraising efforts that directly support cancer research and patient care.

$658k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$226k
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$2.4MPhilanthropy$55kRecreation & Sports$32k
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k4 grants · $57k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $601k
$50,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$82k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
INOVA SCHAR CANCER INSTITUTE (INOVA HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATION)$226,000
CHILDRENS HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA$225,000
DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE$100,000
LIFE WITH CANCER (INOVA HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATION)$50,000
MONUMENTAL SPORT & ENTERTAINMENT FOUNDATION$20,000
RWJ BARNABAS HEALTH INC$15,000
THE GOALIE GUILD$11,500
ELLIE FUND$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 8%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 14% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%ELLIE FUND: $10k → 7%TUFTS MEDICAL CENTER INC: $5k → 16%CHILDRENS HOSPITAL PITTSBURGH FOUNDATION: $5k → 11%CHILDRENS HOSPITAL: $150k → 22%NORTHWELL HEALTH CANCER INSTITUTE: $5k → 6%MONUMENTAL SPORT & ENTERTAINMENT FOUNDATION: $20k → 14%GOALIE GUILD: $22k → 3%USA HOCKEY FOUNDATION: $10k → 9%RWJ BARNABAS HEALTH INC: $15k → 6%CLARA MAASS FOUNDATION (NJ HFC): $15k → 11%INOVA SCHAR CANCER INSTITUTE (INOVA HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATION): $226k → 6%ELLIE FUND: $10k → 7%CHILDRENS HOSPITAL: $55k → 22%MONUMENTAL SPORT & ENTERTAINMENT FOUNDATION: $20k → 14%THE GOALIE GUILD: $12k → 3%COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $10k → 11%INOVA SCHAR CANCER INSTITUTE (INOVA HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATION): $200k → 6%ELLIE FUND: $5k → 7%MONUMENTAL SPORT & ENTERTAINMENT FOUNDATION: $20k → 14%THE GOALIE GUILD: $10k → 3%INOVA SCHAR CANCER INSTITUTE (INOVA HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATION): $200k → 6%DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE: $100k → 7%MONUMENTAL SPORT & ENTERTAINMENT FOUNDATION: $15k → 14%GOALIE GUILD INC: $10k → 3%INOVA SCHAR CANCER INSTITUTE (INOVA HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATION): $200k → 6%DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE: $100k → 7%THE GOALIE GUILD: $10k → 3%INOVA SCHAR CANCER INST: $150k → 6%DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE: $100k → 7%INOVA SCHAR CANCER INSTITUTE: $100k → 6%DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE: $80k → 7%INOVA SCHAR CANCER INST: $100k → 6%INOVA SCHAR CANCER INST: $100k → 6%LIFE WITH CANCER (INOVA HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATION): $50k → 6%LIFE WITH CANCER (INOVA HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATION): $50k → 6%LIFE WITH CANCER (INOVA HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATION): $50k → 6%LIFE WITH CANCER (INOVA HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATION): $45k → 6%LIFE WITH CANCER: $30k → 6%LIFE WITH CANCER: $30k → 6%LIFE WITH CANCER: $30k → 6%LIFE WITH CANCER: $25k → 6%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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.1M · 8 repeat orgs$75k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +58% since the first grant, against +7% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
7

Total granted

$3.1M
$60k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+58%
+7%

Still filing today

63%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’22’23’24’25
HealthPhilanthropyEducationOther
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× · 2018–2025 · $980k · revenue +72%
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc
    4× · 2022–2025 · $380k · revenue +47%
  • MS
    MONUMENTAL SPORTS & ENTERTAINMENT FOUNDATION
    4× · 2022–2025 · $75k · revenue +149%

Funded once

  • CM
    CLARA MAASS FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2024 · $15k · revenue 0%
  • CM
    COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +7%
  • UH
    USA HOCKEY FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +45%
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
Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital

The mission of robert wood johnson university hospital is to improve the health and well-being of the patients and communities we serve by fostering an environment of excellence in all areas including the provision of the highest quality,…

Health
2
Clara Maass Medical Center

Cmmc is committed to providing exceptional services and quality to the communities they serve through their passion for excellence and perfection. cmmc prides itself on commitment and compassion, leadership and loyalty, accountability,…

Health
3
Community Medical Center

The organization, a not-for-profit acute care hospital serving the ocean county region, is committed to enhancing the overall health status of the community by providing the highest quality healthcare and related services including…

Health
4
Monmouth Medical Center

To meet the healthcare needs of our community by providing cost-effective quality care. to educate present and future generations of healthcare providers. to provide a continuum of regional tertiary care. please refer to the organization's…

Health
5
Jersey City Medical Center

The organization's mission is to offer healthcare services with compassion and dignity. the organization provides patients, their families and all in need, excellence in hospital and healthcare services and programs to enhance community…

Health
6
Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital Rahway

To deliver safe, quality, cost effective healthcare services, providing access and value to the community through a unified effort that meets individual needs with dignity and respect. through its dynamic, strategic partnerships, robert…

Health
7
Newark Beth Israel Medical Center

The spirit that infuses newark beth israel medical center and children's hospital of new jersey is its commitment to excellence. our mission is to achieve this excellence through: - the delivery of primary health care to all who need our…

Health
8
Children's Specialized Hospital

To be the preeminent provider of specialized healthcare services for infants, children and young adults. the organization provides medically necessary pediatric healthcare services to all children in a non-discriminatory manner regardless…

Health
9
Saint Barnabas Medical Center

Saint barnabas medical center, a non-sectarian healthcare institution, will pursue the delivery of primary, secondary, and tertiary health services while consistently meeting the highest quality of care and meeting our customers'…

Health
10
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
11
Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital at Hamilton

The organization provides medically necessary healthcare services to all individuals in a non-discriminatory manner regardless of race, color, creed, sex, national origin or ability to pay. please refer to the organization's community…

Health
12
Rwj Barnabas Health Inc - Subordinates

Rwjbarnabas health - as the leading academic health system in new jersey - is advancing innovative strategies in high quality patient care, education and research to address both the clinical and social determinants of health. the entities…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Community Medical Center Foundation; 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

10 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. 10 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
7/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

INOVA HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATION: $1,021,000 · HealthINOVA HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATIONTHE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA: $980,000 · HealthTHE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIADana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: $380,000 · HealthDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc+6 more: $60,000 · HealthINOVA SCHAR CANCER INST: $450,000 · OtherINOVA SCHAR CANCER INS…LIFE WITH CANCER: $115,000 · OtherLIFE WITH CANCERGOALIE GUILD INC: $63,000 · OtherGOALIE GUILD INC+2 more: $15,000 · OtherMONUMENTAL SPORTS & ENTERTAINMENT FOUNDATION: $75,000 · PhilanthropyELLIE FUND INC: $25,000 · Education
Health$2,441,000Other$643,000Philanthropy$75,000Education$25,000

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 budgetINOVA HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATION: $1,021,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA: $980,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: $380,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMONUMENTAL SPORTS & ENTERTAINMENT FOUNDATION: $75,000 over 4y, 1.1% of budgetELLIE FUND INC: $25,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetCLARA MAASS FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetCOMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetUSA HOCKEY FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE RWJ UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PITTSBURGH FOUNDATION: $5,000 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.

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.

The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Bank of America Charitable Foundation IncNC7.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · 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 October Saves Goalie Challenge funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The October Saves Goalie Challenge. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →median 15%
  • Ellie Fund Inc: 15% of income from government
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: 7% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get 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 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 October Saves Goalie Challenge’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