Skip to content
The Ryr-1 Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

The Ryr-1 Foundation

The mission of THE RYR-1 FOUNDATION is to support research leading to an effective treatment or a cure for ryr-1-related diseases through supporting research, providing medical professional education, and patient & family support and advocacy.

$125k
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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.

Science & Tech$275kHealth$235kEducation$140k
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $32,012, the rows itemized in this filing. The $125,420 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $93,408 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

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
$25,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$2.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION$25,000
Individual grant recipient$7,012
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 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 32% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA: $50k → 11%THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA: $60k → 10%THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA: $30k → 11%INGENIOUS TARGETING LABORATORY: $54k → 7%UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER: $20k → 14%COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY SPONSORED PROJECTS FINANCE: $12k → 17%BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE: $60k → 16%GORDON RESEARCH CONFERENCES: $8k → 7%MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION: $25k → 14%NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NURSING RESEARCH: $25k → 8%THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA: $25k → 11%INGENIOUS TARGETING LABORATORY: $21k → 7%UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER: $20k → 14%COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY: $8k → 17%BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE: $30k → 16%NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NURSING RESEARCH: $20k → 8%THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA: $25k → 11%INGENIOUS TARGETING LABORATORY: $19k → 7%UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER: $10k → 14%NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NURSING RESEARCH: $17k → 8%INGENIOUS TARGETING LABORATORY: $12k → 7%UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER: $10k → 14%NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NURSING RESEARCH: $13k → 8%INGENIOUS TARGETING LABORATORY: $10k → 7%NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NURSING RESEARCH: $13k → 8%INGENIOUS TARGETING LABORATORY: $8k → 7%INGENIOUS TARGETING LABORATORY: $7k → 7%INGENIOUS TARGETING LABORATORY: $6k → 7%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

MN
IL
NY
CT
RI
CA
MD
TX

Grants abroad, by region: $93k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$93k · 100% · 2 grants

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.

80%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$504k · 5 repeat orgs$126k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +67% since the first grant, against +23% for those funded once.

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
4

Total granted

$504k
$101k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+67%
+23%

Still filing today

40%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 22% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k 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
EducationScience & TechHealthOther
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

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    8× · 2017–2024 · $137k
  • BC
    Baylor College of Medicine
    3× · 2017–2019 · $120k · revenue +67%
  • TR
    THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
    3× · 2020–2022 · $100k

Funded once

  • RO
    REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
    one grant, 2017 · $60k
  • TR
    THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
    one grant, 2019 · $30k
  • GR
    GORDON RESEARCH CONFERENCES INC
    one grant, 2019 · $8k · revenue +23%
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
04the grantee network

5 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. 5 of the 11 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)
5/5
Grantees still filing
5/5
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $137,150 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTHE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA: $99,987 · OtherTHE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTANATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NURSING RESEARCH: $86,783 · OtherNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NURSING RESEARCHREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA: $60,000 · OtherREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIATHE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA: $30,000 · OtherTHE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA+1 more: $3,565 · OtherBaylor College of Medicine: $120,000 · EducationBaylor College of MedicineUNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER: $60,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTERTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK: $19,547 · EducationTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSIT…MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION INC: $25,000 · HealthGORDON RESEARCH CONFERENCES INC: $7,500 · Science & Tech
Other$417,485Education$199,547Health$25,000Science & Tech$7,500

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

25%50%75%100%$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBaylor College of Medicine: $120,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER: $60,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK: $19,547 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGORDON RESEARCH CONFERENCES INC: $7,500 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 Baylor College of Medicine ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER ↗
  • Who funds MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
  • Who funds GORDON RESEARCH CONFERENCES INC ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The Ryr-1 Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Ryr-1 Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’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 →
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Ryr-1 Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Ryr-1 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.

    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 11 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 Ryr-1’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