· Public charity
Xavier University of Louisiana
The ultimate mission of the university is to contribute to the promotion of a more just and humane society by preparing its students to assume roles of leadership and service in a global society.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 6 grants below total $289,134 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $14,476,243 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $14,187,109 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 · FY2025
- Under $10k2 grants · $13k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $35k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $242k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| OSHSNER CLINIC FOUNDATION | $140,000 |
| TULANE UNIVERSITY | $101,693 |
| UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA BIRMINGHAM | $24,321 |
| UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS | $10,337 |
| NUNEZ COMMUNITY COLLEGE | $7,393 |
| LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY | $5,390 |
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 (FY22–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 90% 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.
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 +43% since the first grant, against +29% for the ones you funded once.
22 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2025, 18 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
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 FY2025, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13k 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
Teach for America Inc3× · 2018–2021 · $2.2M · revenue +1%
RELAY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION4× · 2018–2022 · $1.6M · revenue +1%- OCOCHSNER CLINIC FOUNDATION6× · 2020–2025 · $1.2M · revenue +43%
Funded once
- OUOAKLAND UNIVERSITYone grant, 2023 · $67k
- TRThe Research Foundation for The State University of New Yorkgraduatedone grant, 2024 · $28k · revenue +29%
- NONEW ORLEANS FOOD POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEEone grant, 2024 · $28k · revenue 0%
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.
Dartmouth College educates the most promising students and prepares them for a lifetime of learning and of responsible leadership, through a faculty dedicated to teaching and the creation of knowledge.
The mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…
The university's goal in the coming decade is to advance learning through the integration of teaching, research and service to others. the core of this goal is to prepare graduates to engage with the world and lead lives of meaning. to do…
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
University of the sciences prepares students to become leaders, innovators, and skilled practitioners in the sciences, the health professions, and related disciplines. we deliver excellence in teaching, research, and service through a safe…
Education and Research
See Disclosure Above.
Trinity university is an independent co-educational university whose mission is excellence in the interrelated areas of teaching, research and services.
The University of New Orleans Foundation's mission is to promote the well-being and advancement of the University of New Orleans and all the colleges, schools, departments, and divisions comprising it, and to develop, expand, and improve…
Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.
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.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Administrators of the Tulane Educational Fund and the most unlike its peers is Brothers Empowered to Teach. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 31 years old; the field is 15. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 17% 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.
19 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. 19 of the 30 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 Teach for America Inc ↗
- Who funds RELAY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds OCHSNER CLINIC FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NEW SCHOOLS FOR NEW ORLEANS INC ↗
- Who funds GEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds TNTP INC ↗
- Who funds LOYOLA UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds THE ADMINISTRATORS OF THE TULANE EDUCATIONAL FUND ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER MANAGEMENT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds BROTHERS EMPOWERED TO TEACH ↗
- Who funds JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds WEST JEFFERSON HOSPITAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds University of Chicago ↗
- Who funds University of Notre Dame du Lac ↗
- Who funds The Research Foundation for The State University of New York ↗
- Who funds NEW ORLEANS FOOD POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE ↗
- Who funds Nunez Community College Foundation ↗
- Who funds DILLARD UNIVERSITY ↗
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 Cancer Society Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
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 Xavier University of Louisiana 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.