Loading…
Loading…
South Carolina · Nonprofit
LOUVENIA D BARKSDALE SICKLE CELL ANEMIA FOUNDATIO (South Carolina) is funded by 2 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $405,000 in grants to it, the largest being LOUVENIA D BARKSDALE SICKLE CELL ANEMIA FOUNDATION INC ($400,000). 1 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
LOUVENIA D BARKSDALE SICKLE CELL ANEMIA FOUNDATIO has grown faster than half of the 12,769 health nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 12,769 health nonprofits $100k–$1M, FY2024
Revenue, expenses and net assets — each indexed to 100 at its first filing year, so you read the trajectory, not the magnitude. The shaded band is where the middle 50% of its peers' revenue would sit, given their growth.
The funding model — what share of revenue comes from contributions, programs, investments and other sources — and whether it's shifting.
100% of LOUVENIA D BARKSDALE SICKLE CELL ANEMIA FOUNDATIO’s revenue is contributions — more reliant on donations than three-quarters of its peers (78% for the typical peer).
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 3 of the last 6 reported years ran a deficit.
The base broadened — 1 funders to 2 as grant income moved $3k → $403k.
From the IRS filings of LOUVENIA D BARKSDALE SICKLE CELL ANEMIA FOUNDATIO’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
LOUVENIA D BARKSDALE SICKLE CELL ANEMIA FOUNDATIO leans on a few funders — its largest provides 99% of grant income and the top three 100%; half comes from just 1 funder.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 1 funder to its left
Largest funder’s share by year: 2021 100% · 2022 99% — broadly stable.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
LOUVENIA D BARKSDALE SICKLE CELL ANEMIA FOUNDATIO is locally rooted: 100% of its grant income comes from South Carolina funders.
In-state vs out-of-state, by year
Grantmakers that don’t fund you yet, surfaced two ways: they back organizations that share your funders, or their grantees resemble your mission. The ones both signals agree on come first.
From the co-funder graph (funders backing at least two comparable organizations, shrunk for grantee count, donor-advised and mega-funds excluded) and the universe embeddings. A research starting point; overlap is association, not a guarantee of fit.
Nonprofits whose mission and program text most resemble this one, by semantic similarity over the universe of US filings — the closest peers, and often the clearest route to shared or prospective funders.
Read directly from this organization’s own Form 990, as neutral context.
79% of spending goes to programs.
78%
Share of support from the public (Schedule A) — the basis for its public-charity status.
Operates in 1 state
Every figure is read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML — this organization’s own return for FY2024 (financials across 2019–2024), and the filings of 2funders that report grants to it. “On record” means captured in the filings we have parsed — a funder that does not e-file, or whose grant detail is not itemized, will not appear. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind. view filing