· Private foundation
Worthwhile Life Incorporated F/K/A Mohawk Rubber Charitable
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 82% of WORTHWHILE LIFE INCORPORATED F/K/A MOHAWK RUBBER CHARITABLE’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k1 grant · $9k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $33k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Individual grant recipient | $32,787 |
| THE JIMMY FUND | $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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–21, $8k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 42% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
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 +49% since the first grant, against +19% for the ones you funded once.
8 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down.
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
- IGIndividual grant recipient7× · 2017–2024 · $255k
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc6× · 2018–2024 · $42k · revenue +98%- MGMASS GENERAL BRIGHAM2× · 2022–2023 · $4k
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2019 · $49k
- ACAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETYMAKING STRIDES AGAINST BREAST CANCERone grant, 2017 · $16k
- MYMA YOUTH SPORTS AED PROGRAM INCone grant, 2022 · $16k · 56% of their budget
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 Dana-Farber Cancer Care Network (DFCCN) is to promote and support, directly or indirectly, the interests and purposes of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI).
Break through cancer is a foundation dedicated to supporting translational research in the most difficult to treat cancers. our partner organizations are among the top cancer research centers and together, represent some of the most…
Curesearch's mission is to fund & support targeted & innovative cancer research with measurable results, & to be the authoritative source of information & resources for all those affected by children's cancer. see schedule o for…
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…
The mission of the breast cancer research foundation, inc. is to prevent and cure breast cancer by advancing the world's most promising research.
Conquer cancer funds research for every type of cancer to benefit every patient, everywhere. working in collaboration with a global network of top scientists and clinicians, and leading advocacy and research organizations, conquer cancer…
The mission of the head for the cure foundation (hftc) is threefold: to build awareness, raise funding, and inspire hope for the community of brain cancer patients, their families, friends, caregivers and other supporters, while…
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)…
Accelerate and increase impact of scientific discoveries within cancer biology and oncology.
To make all childhood cancers universally survivable by delivering new treatments to clinical trials through scientific discovery.
Susan g. komen 's mission is to save lives by meeting the most critical needs in our communities & investing in breakthrough research to prevent & cure breast cancer.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Pan-Massachusetts Challenge Inc and the most unlike its peers is The Tripp Healy Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 29 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 18% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
28 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. 28 of the 62 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 Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc ↗
- Who funds MA YOUTH SPORTS AED PROGRAM INC ↗
- Who funds GREG HILL FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTH SHORE BANK CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds BEAR BE A RESOURCE FOR CPS KIDS ↗
- Who funds ROLLING WAVE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE TRIPP HEALY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Lost-N-Found Youth Inc ↗
- Who funds MEDICINES FOR HUMANITY INC ↗
- Who funds LOVE LIFE NOW FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds PAN-MASSACHUSETTS CHALLENGE INC ↗
- Who funds THE ADENOID CYSTIC CARCINOMA RESEARCH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HORIZONS FOR HOMELESS CHILDREN ↗
- Who funds SHARING INC KAY DOHERTY PRESIDENT ↗
- Who funds CAPE COD MILITARY SUPPORT FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Support the Soupman Corp ↗
- Who funds DOVE INC ↗
- Who funds CASA OF WYOMING VALLEY ↗
- Who funds ONE MISSION INC ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: American Tower Corporation Foundation Inc · Eastern Bank Foundation · Citizens Charitable Foundation · Boston Foundation Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · The Chicago Community Trust · Ge Aerospace Foundation · Verizon Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Worthwhile Life Incorporated F/K/A Mohawk Rubber Charitable 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Dove Inc — 60% of income from government
- Horizons for Homeless Children — 21% of income from government
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — 7% of income from government
- The New England Center for Children Inc — 3% of income from government
- Pan-Massachusetts Challenge Inc — 0% 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.