· Public charity
A T Still University of Health Sciences
A.T.
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 8 grants below total $76,300 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $2,262,418 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $2,186,118 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–50k6 grants · $63k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Arizona Association of Community Health Centers Inc | $13,000 |
| Christian Community Health Fellowship Inc | $10,000 |
| Missouri Coalition for Primary Hlth | $10,000 |
| Teche Action Clinic | $10,000 |
| Special Olympics Missouri Inc | $10,000 |
| Mollen Foundation for Childhood Obesity | $10,000 |
| American Osteopathic Foundation Inc | $7,800 |
| California Primary Care Association | $5,500 |
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 82% 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.
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 +40% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
6 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 3 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, 67% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $26k 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
- AAARIZONA ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS INC5× · 2021–2025 · $55k · revenue +85%
- AOAMERICAN OSTEOPATHIC FOUNDATION4× · 2020–2025 · $27k · revenue +40%
- MCMISSOURI COALITION FOR PRIMARY HEALTH CARE2× · 2019–2025 · $20k · revenue +420%
Funded once
- ACADAIR COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENTone grant, 2021 · $25k
- AOArizona Osteopathic Medical Associationone grant, 2018 · $14k · revenue -12%
- MAMISSOURI ASSOCIATION OF OSTEOPATHIC PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONSgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +40%
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.
American college of occupational and environmental medicine (acoem) provides leadership to promote optimal health and safety of workers, workplaces and environments by: educating health professionals and the public; stimulating research;…
Our mission is to advance the practice of medicine through advocacy, education, and engagement with physicians throughout iowa to ensure the highest quality of care for the patients they serve.
To teach, advocate, and research the science, art and philosophy of osteopathic medicine, emphasizing the integration of osteopathic principles, practices and manipulative treatment in patient care.
The american osteopathic association (aoa) is a membership association representing more than 168,000 osteopathic physicians (do) and osteopathic medical students. as the primary certifying body for do and the accrediting agency for all…
Aacom leads and advocates for the osteopathic medical education community to improve the health of the public. aacom represents and advances the continuum of medical education by: supporting our member institutions as they educate the…
To be the leading voice of medicine to make minnesota the healthiest state and the best place to practice.
To maintain and enhance excellence in optometric practice.
Advancing, promoting and preserving the specialty of oral and maxillofacial surgery as well as the skills and professionalism of aaoms members to ensure patient access to safe and effective care.
Serving our professionals to provide the highest quality musculoskeletal care.
None
American association of medical society executives (aamse) is committed to educating and supporting medical society professionals to advance the profession of medical society management, medical societies, and the physicians they serve.
See schedule o:asco is a professional oncology society committed to conquering cancer through research, education, and promotion of the highest quality patient care.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Arizona Association of Community Health Centers Inc and the most unlike its peers is American Student Dental Association. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
13 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. 13 of the 14 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 ARIZONA ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS INC ↗
- Who funds CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY HEALTH FELLOWSHIP INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN OSTEOPATHIC FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MISSOURI COALITION FOR PRIMARY HEALTH CARE ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN STUDENT DENTAL ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds TECHE ACTION BOARD INC ↗
- Who funds Arizona Osteopathic Medical Association ↗
- Who funds MOLLEN FOUNDATION FOR CHILDHOOD OBESITY ↗
- Who funds SPECIAL OLYMPICS MISSOURI INC ↗
- Who funds MISSOURI ASSOCIATION OF OSTEOPATHIC PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSE PRACTITIONERS ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA PRIMARY CARE ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds WM L WETZEL MEMORIAL OSTEOPATHIC EDUCATIONAL & RESEARCH FOUNDATION ↗
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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.
Open a dossier: 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 A T Still University of Health Sciences 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.
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.