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

· Private foundation

The Price 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.

$209k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$150k
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.

Education$1.2MRecreation & Sports$906kReligion$233kPhilanthropy$60kArts & Culture$30kHuman Services$25kSocial Science$18kHealth$17kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $9k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $200k
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$362k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BPS Foundation$150,000
Community Initiatives - Champion of Westwood Fnd$50,000
Lynne Cohen Foundation$5,000
Phase One Foundation$2,500
Rett Syndrome Research Trust$1,000
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 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 96% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Community Initiatives - Champion of Westwood Fnd: $50k → 10%San Francisco Moma: $20k → 10%Lynne Cohen Foundation: $5k → 14%The West Project: $300k → 16%Chabad GW University: $1k → 14%Rett Syndrome Research Trust: $1k → 9%Team First Foundation: $100k → 16%Northwestern University: $55k → 14%BPS Foundation: $150k → 13%Blossomy Project: $5k → 10%I AM That Girl: $200 → 14%Chabad GW University: $388 → 14%Rett Syndrome Research Trust: $1k → 9%Northwestern University: $55k → 14%BPS Foundation: $150k → 13%Blossomy Project: $5k → 10%I AM That Girl: $150 → 14%Northwestern University: $50k → 14%Blossomy Project: $5k → 10%Hirshberg Foundation: $450 → 14%Northwestern University: $200 → 14%Blossomy Project: $5k → 10%Hirshberg Foundation: $250 → 14%Blossomy Project: $5k → 10%Phase One Foundation: $5k → 14%Phase One Foundation: $3k → 14%Milken Institute: $18k → 14%Harvard Westlake School: $25k → 14%Harvard Westlake School: $25k → 14%Harvard Westlake School: $1k → 14%UCLA Foundation: $229k → 14%UCLA Foundation: $222k → 14%UCLA Foundation: $210k → 14%UCLA Foundation: $157k → 14%UCLA Foundation: $148k → 14%UCLA Foundation: $119k → 14%Wooden Athletic Fund: $45k → 14%UCLA Foundation: $20k → 14%Wilshire Blvd Temple: $80k → 14%Wilshire Blvd Temple: $60k → 14%Wilshire Blvd Temple: $46k → 14%Harmony Project: $10k → 14%Wilshire Blvd Temple: $7k → 14%Wilshire Blvd Temple: $7k → 14%Wilshire Blvd Temple: $6k → 14%The Jewish Federation of Greater Los Angeles: $10k → 14%Cedars-Sinai: $2k → 14%Miracles & Wonders Foundation: $25k → 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.

56%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$756k · 10 repeat orgs$584k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +21% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
11

Total granted

$756k
$529k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+21%
0%

Still filing today

50%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $55k 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
Recreation & SportsHealthEducationYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • Northwestern University
    4× · 2017–2020 · $161k · revenue +41%
  • HS
    HARVARD-WESTLAKE SCHOOL
    3× · 2017–2019 · $51k · revenue +21%
  • PO
    PHASE ONE FOUNDATION
    2× · 2023–2025 · $8k · revenue +30%

Funded once

  • TW
    The West Project
    one grant, 2024 · $300k · 29% of their budget
  • TF
    Team First Foundation
    one grant, 2023 · $100k · revenue -85%
  • WA
    Wooden Athletic Fund
    one grant, 2017 · $45k
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
California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy

To harness the power of the human immune system and advanced computing technologies to create and translate scientific discoveries into next generation vaccines and therapies for prevention, control and cure of chronic diseases, enabling…

Health
2
Western University of Health Sciences

To produce, in a humanistic tradition, health care professionals and biomedical knowledge that will enhance and extend the quality of life in our communities.

—
3
The Scripps Research Institute

The scripps research institute ("tsri") performs high impact basic biomedical research, improves the human condition by fostering translation of its discoveries into useful products and engages in the highest quality graduate scientific…

Health
4
Vanderbilt University

See Disclosure Above.

Education
5
University of California Irvine Foundation

The mission of the university of california, irvine foundation (uc irvine foundation) is to raise and manage private funds to support uc irvine's broader mission of excellence in teaching, research and public service. to this end, the uc…

Education
6
Claremont Graduate University

Claremont Graduate University prepares individuals to be leaders for positive change in the world. Unique in its transdisciplinary approach, the University is dedicated to the creation, dissemination, and application of new knowledge and…

Education
7
Uc Riverside Foundation

To support educational, research and public functions and programs of the riverside campus of the university of california.

Education
8
Harvey Mudd College

HMC seeks to educate engineers, scientists, and mathematicians well versed in all of these areas and in the humanities, social sciences and the arts so that they may assume leadership in their fields with a clear understanding of the…

Education
9
Uc Santa Barbara Foundation

The uc santa barbara foundation actively works to further the goals of the university of california, santa barbara. the foundation seeks to maintain and nurture the university's quality and distinction. on behalf of the campus, the…

Education
10
Samuel Waxman Cancer Research Foundation

The samuel waxman cancer research foundation (the "foundation") funds innovative research to bring faster cures to patients. in addition to supporting ongoing collaborative research in specific cancers, our scientists are investigating the…

—
11
The California Medical Innovations Institute Inc

The Institute is a scientific research center dedicated to conducting basic and applied research to advance the understanding of human disease and the improvement of human health. The Institute fosters an innovative research environment…

Education
12
Ucsf Foundation Investment Company

The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ucla Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Miracles & Wonders Foundation. 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

15 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. 15 of the 24 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/15
Grantees still filing
8/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UCLA FOUNDATION: $1,104,900 · EducationUCLA FOUNDATIONHARVARD-WESTLAKE SCHOOL: $51,000 · Education+1 more: $10,000 · EducationBPS FOUNDATION: $300,000 · OtherBPS FOUNDATIONWILSHIRE BOULEVARD TEMPLE: $206,870 · OtherWILSHIRE BOULEVARD TEMPLECommunity Initiatives - Champion of Westwood Fnd: $50,000 · OtherCommunity Initiatives - Champion…Wooden Athletic Fund: $45,200 · OtherWooden Athletic FundBLOSSOMY PROJECT: $25,100 · OtherMIRACLES & WONDERS FOUNDATION: $25,000 · Other+7 more: $55,488 · Other+7 moreThe West Project: $300,000 · Recreation & SportsThe West ProjectNorthwestern University: $160,600 · Recreation & SportsNorthwestern UniversityTeam First Foundation: $100,000 · Recreation & SportsTeam First FoundationPHASE ONE FOUNDATION: $7,500 · HealthRETT SYNDROME RESEARCH TRUST INC: $2,000 · HealthCEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER: $1,500 · HealthTHE PAINTED TURTLE: $100 · Youth DevelopmentHAROLD ROBINSON FOUNDATION: $100 · Youth Development
Education$1,165,900Other$707,658Recreation & Sports$560,600Health$11,000Youth Development$200

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUCLA FOUNDATION: $1,104,900 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetBPS FOUNDATION: $300,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetThe West Project: $300,000 over 1y, 29% of budgetNorthwestern University: $160,600 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTeam First Foundation: $100,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetHARVARD-WESTLAKE SCHOOL: $51,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMIRACLES & WONDERS FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 1y, 100% of budgetTHE MILKEN INSTITUTE: $17,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHarmony Project: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPHASE ONE FOUNDATION: $7,500 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetRETT SYNDROME RESEARCH TRUST INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetI AM THAT GIRL: $350 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE PAINTED TURTLE: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHAROLD ROBINSON FOUNDATION: $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 UCLA FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds BPS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds The West Project ↗
  • Who funds Northwestern University ↗
  • Who funds Team First Foundation ↗
  • Who funds HARVARD-WESTLAKE SCHOOL ↗
  • Who funds MIRACLES & WONDERS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE MILKEN INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds Harmony Project ↗
  • Who funds PHASE ONE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds RETT SYNDROME RESEARCH TRUST INC ↗
  • Who funds CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER ↗
  • Who funds I AM THAT GIRL ↗
  • Who funds THE PAINTED TURTLE ↗
  • Who funds HAROLD ROBINSON FOUNDATION ↗

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.

Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …
Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO5.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Price Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Price Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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 24 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 Price’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