Skip to content
United Leukodystrophy Foundation Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

United Leukodystrophy Foundation Inc

The United Leukodystrophy Foundation is dedicated to helping children and adults who have Leukodystrophy and assisting family members, professionals and support services that serve them.

$33k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$33k
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$208kScience & Tech$195kEducation$33k
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$33,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UMass Chan Medical School$33,000
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.

US giving: 85% of grant dollars ($370k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 15% that went abroad ($66k) is mapped below.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 79% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Mayo Clinic: $4k → 9%Univ of Minnesota: $35k → 11%Children's Hospital of Philadelphia: $33k → 22%Stanford Univ-School of Medicine: $17k → 7%Washington University: $33k → 21%UNC at Chapel Hill: $33k → 13%Univ of Utah: $13k → 8%Children's National Hospital: $20k → 8%Kennedy Krieger Institute: $20k → 19%Kennedy Krieger Institute: $20k → 19%Kennedy Krieger Institute: $20k → 19%Kennedy Krieger Institute: $9k → 19%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
MA
PA
CA
UT
MO
MD
NC

Beyond the US: 15% of all-years giving ($66k)

2 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
Australia$33k · 1 grant
Italy$33k · 1 grant
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

44%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$185k · 3 repeat orgs$231k to everyone else

3 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
7

Total granted

$185k
$198k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+74%
+76%

Still filing today

67%
29%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $33k 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
HealthScience & TechEducationOther
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

  • HW
    HUGO W MOSER RESEARCH INSTITUTE AT KENNEDY KRIEGER INC
    4× · 2019–2024 · $69k · revenue +74%
  • TC
    THE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA
    2× · 2018–2020 · $66k · revenue +72%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
    2× · 2017–2019 · $50k

Funded once

  • UO
    University of Sydney
    one grant, 2019 · $33k
  • UO
    Univ of Rome Tor Vergata
    one grant, 2018 · $33k
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL
    one grant, 2017 · $33k
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

6 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. 6 of the 13 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)
6/6
Grantees still filing
6/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA: $50,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTAUniversity of Sydney: $33,000 · OtherUniversity of SydneyUniv of Rome Tor Vergata: $33,000 · OtherUniv of Rome Tor VergataUNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL: $33,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILLTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS: $33,000 · OtherTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOISUNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS: $33,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTSUNIVERSITY OF UTAH: $13,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF UTAHTHE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA: $66,000 · HealthTHE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL…CHILDREN'S RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $20,000 · HealthCHILDREN'S RESEARCH INS…MAYO CLINIC: $3,841 · HealthHUGO W MOSER RESEARCH INSTITUTE AT KENNEDY KRIEGER INC: $68,671 · Science & TechHUGO W MOSER RESE…WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $33,000 · EducationWASHINGTON U…THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $16,500 · EducationTHE BOARD OF…
Other$228,000Health$89,841Science & Tech$68,671Education$49,500

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 budgetHUGO W MOSER RESEARCH INSTITUTE AT KENNEDY KRIEGER INC: $68,671 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA: $66,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $33,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHILDREN'S RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $16,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMAYO CLINIC: $3,841 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization United Leukodystrophy Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from United Leukodystrophy Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 39%
  • Hugo W Moser Research Institute at Kennedy Krieger Inc: 39% of 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 · 0–90%
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 United Leukodystrophy Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to United Leukodystrophy 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 13 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 United Leukodystrophy’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