· Public charity
Van Andel Research Institute
Medical research organization VAN ANDEL RESEARCH INSTITUTE is an independent biomedical research organization committed to improving the health and enhancing the lives of current and future generations.
Read this first · the figures below need context
93% of Van Andel Research Institute’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Entertainment Industry Foundation, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 3 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2017, the last year Van Andel Research Institute named its own grantees at scale: 5 organizations, $607k. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 6 grants below total $607,279 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $1,012,021 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $404,742 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2017
- Under $10k1 grant · $9k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $49k
- $50k–250k4 grants · $550k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY | $155,875 |
| MEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER | $150,000 |
| JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY | $146,253 |
| INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RESEARCH | $97,467 |
| UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA | $48,684 |
| FRIENDS OF CRESCENT PARK | $9,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 97% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Grants abroad, by region — $790k 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.
Stated purpose: TO FUND LINKED CLINICAL TRIALS RESEARCH COLLABORATION
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your 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.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +64% since the first grant, against -3% for the ones you funded once.
5 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2017, 2 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2017 (too recent to call). Read against FY2017, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY2× · 2017–2018 · $290k · revenue +64%- MSMICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY2× · 2017–2020 · $161k
- FOFRIENDS OF CRESCENT PARK7× · 2017–2024 · $89k · revenue -24% · 100% of their budget
Funded once
MEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTERgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $150k · revenue +121%- FCFox Chase Cancer Center Foundationone grant, 2017 · $97k · revenue -72%
- TIThe Institute For Cancer Researchone grant, 2018 · $54k · revenue -3%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
Asco association promotes the common business interests of its members by: (1) advocating for policies that improve the quality of cancer care; (2) maintaining the highest standards of oncology medical care through programs supporting…
See schedule o:asco is a professional oncology society committed to conquering cancer through research, education, and promotion of the highest quality patient care.
Our mission is to accelerate scientific progress, understand the root causes of disease, and narrow the gap between discoveries and impact on patients.
The american college of radiology (acr) is organized to advance radiology science, practice and access, improve quality and safety, provide continuing education for radiology and allied professionals, and achieve better outcomes through…
Research, education and general - princeton university is a private not-for-profit, non-sectarian institution of higher learning with approximately 5,700 undergraduate and 3,300 graduate students. 2,500 students graduated in the 2024-2025…
Education, research, medical services and other public services.
Enhance the ability of actec members to provide the most efficient and highest quality services to their clients; develop qualified trust and estate counselors; improve and reform probate, trust and tax laws, procedures, and standards of…
Organization's mission: boston university is an international, comprehensive, private research university, committed to educating students to be reflective, resourceful individuals ready to live, adapt, and lead in an interconnected world.…
To deliver preeminent medical care and service to our patients and communities through outstanding and innovative medical leadership and practice, while participating in and supporting excellence in education and research. We achieve this…
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…
Case Western Reserve University is an independent, research-oriented university with broadly based strengths in health, including medicine, nursing and dentistry; in engineering; in the arts and sciences; and in law, management and social…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Institute for Cancer Research and the most unlike its peers is The Economic Club of Grand Rapids. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
11 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 11 of the 13 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds MEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER ↗
- Who funds Fox Chase Cancer Center Foundation ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF CRESCENT PARK ↗
- Who funds THE ECONOMIC CLUB OF GRAND RAPIDS ↗
- Who funds The Institute For Cancer Research ↗
- Who funds Temple University - Of The Commonwealth System of Higher Education ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds GORDON RESEARCH CONFERENCES INC ↗
- Who funds THE BIOPHYSICAL SOCIETY ↗
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Van Andel Research Institute funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Johns Hopkins University — 12% of income from government
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Van Andel Research Institute?
Find your warmest path to Van Andel Research Institute 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.