Skip to content
Ty Louis Campbell Foundation Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Ty Louis Campbell Foundation Inc

None

$285k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$100k
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 2025.

Health$1.3M
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $216,500, the rows itemized in this filing. The $284,500 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $68,000 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 · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $17k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $200k
$50,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$1.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WEILL CORNELL$100,000
HUNTSMAN CANCER FOUNDATION$50,000
ST BALDERICK'S FUNDATION$50,000
CRISTIAN RIVERA FOUNDATION$16,500
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 10%. 73% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE: $5k → 16%ST BALDERICK'S FUNDATION: $100k → 14%TEAM CONTINUUM: $10k → 6%PEDIATRIC CANCER FOUNDATION: $12k → 9%SOLVING KIDS CANCER: $30k → 17%HUNTSMAN CANCER FOUNDATION: $50k → 8%SWIFTY FOUNATION: $25k → 7%CRISTIAN RIVERA FOUNDATION: $17k → 7%St Baldrick's Foundation: $61k → 14%Solving Kids Cancer: $25k → 17%HUNTSMAN CANCER FOUNDATION: $50k → 8%SWIFTY FOUNATION: $25k → 7%CRISTIAN RIVERA FOUNDATION: $6k → 7%ST BALDRICK'S FOUNDATION: $50k → 14%SOLVING KIDS CANCER: $25k → 17%HUNTSMAN CANCER FOUNDATION: $50k → 8%SWIFTY FOUNATION: $25k → 7%CRISTIAN RIVERA FOUNDATION: $6k → 7%ST BALDERICK'S FUNDATION: $50k → 14%WEILL CORNELL: $103k → 17%HUNTSMAN CANCER FOUNDATION: $50k → 8%SWIFTY FOUNATION: $15k → 7%THE CRISTIAN RIVERA FOUNDATION: $5k → 7%ST BALDERICK'S FUNDATION: $50k → 14%WEILL CORNELL: $103k → 17%ST BALDRICK'S FOUNDATION: $15k → 14%WEILL CORNELL: $100k → 17%WEILL CORNELL: $65k → 17%WEILL CORNELL: $61k → 17%WEILL CORNELL: $25k → 17%Weill Cornell: $25k → 17%CHILDREN'S BRAIN TUMOR FOUNDATION: $30k → 17%CHILDREN'S BRAIN TUMOR FOUNDATION: $22k → 17%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 31% of Ty Louis Campbell Foundation Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 49% of the giving stays in NY; by stated purpose, 44%.

Ty Louis Campbell Foundation Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.2M · 7 repeat orgs$127k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +76% since the first grant, against +16% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
3

Total granted

$1.2M
$27k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+76%
+16%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 54% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $100k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthPhilanthropyOther
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

  • NY
    NEW YORK WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL CENTER FUND INC
    7× · 2017–2023 · $381k · revenue +84%
  • HC
    HUNTSMAN CANCER FOUNDATION
    4× · 2022–2025 · $200k · revenue +166%
  • SF
    Swifty Foundation
    4× · 2020–2024 · $90k · revenue +76%

Funded once

  • PC
    PEDIATRIC CANCER FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2020 · $12k · revenue -67%
  • TC
    TEAM CONTINUUM INC
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue +16%
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Incgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $5k · revenue +95%
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
Targeting Resistance in Cancer Cooperative
Health
2
Dana-Farber Children's Hospital Cancer Care Inc

To oversee, coordinate and support the Pediatric Oncology Programs at Boston Children's Hospital and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Inc.

Health
3
Childrens Brain Tumor Family Foundation

To fund research into better treatments and a cure for pediatric brain tumors and raise awareness of childhood cancer.

—
4
Pano Koumantaros Cancer Research Fund Inc
Philanthropy
5
Warrior Kids Foundation
Health
6
Beth Israel Hospital & Children's Hospital Medical Care Corporation

Pediatric healthcare, education & research

—
7
Sharon Strauss Parker Lymphoma Research Foundation Inc dba Life Lover Found

Funding Cancer Research

Health
8
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
9
Children's Cancer Research Fund

Children's cancer research fund fuels transformational research to bring better treatments and cures to children with cancer.

Philanthropy
10
Blood Cancer United Inc

Our mission is to cure leukemia, lymphoma, hodgkin's disease and myeloma, and improve the quality of life of patients and their families.

Health
11
Cog Research Foundation Llc

Cog research foundation, llc is a california 501(c)(3) entity founded in 2024 and designed to become the federal grantee organization for the children's oncology group (cog). the cog, a member of the national cancer institute (nci)…

Health
12
Children's Cancer Fund of Dallas inc

Children's cancer fund champions kids in their fight against cancer through strategic investments in research and care in north texas.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is St Baldrick's Foundation Inc; 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.
05the 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 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NEW YORK WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL CENTER FUND INC: $381,000 · HealthNEW YORK WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL CENTER FUND INCHUNTSMAN CANCER FOUNDATION: $200,000 · HealthHUNTSMAN CANCER FOUNDATIONSOLVING KIDS' CANCER INC: $80,011 · HealthSOLVING KIDS' CANCER INCCHILDREN'S BRAIN TUMOR FOUNDATION INC: $52,000 · HealthCHILDREN'S BRAIN TUMOR FOUNDATION INC+2 more: $17,250 · HealthST BALDRICK'S FOUNDATION INC: $325,500 · PhilanthropyST BALDRICK'S FOUNDATION INCSwifty Foundation: $90,000 · PhilanthropySwifty FoundationCristian Rivera Foundation: $33,970 · PhilanthropyCristian Rivera Foundation+1 more: $10,000 · PhilanthropyWeill Medical College of Cornell Univers: $100,000 · Other
Health$730,261Philanthropy$459,470Other$100,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNEW YORK WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL CENTER FUND INC: $381,000 over 7y, 1.3% of budgetST BALDRICK'S FOUNDATION INC: $325,500 over 7y, 0.4% of budgetHUNTSMAN CANCER FOUNDATION: $200,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetSwifty Foundation: $90,000 over 4y, 3.3% of budgetSOLVING KIDS' CANCER INC: $80,011 over 4y, 2.9% of budgetCHILDREN'S BRAIN TUMOR FOUNDATION INC: $52,000 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetCristian Rivera Foundation: $33,970 over 4y, 1.8% of budgetPEDIATRIC CANCER FOUNDATION: $12,250 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTEAM CONTINUUM INC: $10,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: $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 Pfizer Foundation…The Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Pfizer Foundation IncNY12.9× affinity5 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Pfizer Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · 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 Ty Louis Campbell Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ty Louis Campbell Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: 7% of 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 · 0–15%
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 Ty Louis Campbell Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Ty Louis Campbell Foundation Inc 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Ty Louis Campbell’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