Skip to content
Ascension Health Global Mission at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Ascension Health Global Mission

Rooted in the loving ministry of Jesus as healer, we commit ourselves to serving all persons with special attention to those who are poor and vulnerable.

$5.4M
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$2.7M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

99% of Ascension Health Global Mission’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Global Impact, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 1 organization directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.

Organizations named directly on the return

2
’17
1
’18
1
’19
1
’20
2
’21
2
’22
2
’23
1
’24

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

International$8.2MPublic Safety & Disaster$25kHuman Services$14k
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $2,725,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $5,376,000 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $2,651,000 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
  • $250k+1 grant · $2.7M
$2,700,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$8.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GLOBAL IMPACT$2,700,000
CHRISTIAN CONNECTIONS FOR INTERNATIONAL HEALTH$25,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY17–23, $858k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%NATIONAL COUNCIL OF THE UNITED STATES SOCIETY OF ST VINCENT DEPAUL INC: $14k → 11%THE TASK FORCE FOR GLOBAL HEALTH INC (MEDSURPLUS ALLIANCE): $204k → 14%THE TASK FORCE FOR GLOBAL HEALTH INC (MEDSURPLUS ALLIANCE): $188k → 14%THE TASK FORCE FOR GLOBAL HEALTH INC (MEDSURPLUS ALLIANCE): $141k → 14%THE TASK FORCE FOR GLOBAL HEALTH INC (MEDSURPLUS ALLIANCE): $125k → 14%THE TASK FORCE FOR GLOBAL HEALTH INC (MEDSURPLUS ALLIANCE): $125k → 14%THE TASK FORCE FOR GLOBAL HEALTH INC (MEDSURPLUS ALLIANCE): $63k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Grants abroad, by region: $2.7M on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 5 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Central America and the Caribbean$1.9M · 72% · 4 grants

Stated purpose: Medicines for Humanity · HAITI RELIEF EFFORTS · Emergency Response to the Migrant Crisis in Central America

Middle East and North Africa$325k · 12% · 3 grants

Stated purpose: Catholic Relief Services Holy Land Support · To Support the Yemen Humanitarian Crisis · To Support Jerusalem, West Bank and Gaza (Holy Land) Humanitarian Efforts

Sub-Saharan Africa$245k · 9% · 4 grants

Stated purpose: To support the quality healthcare of impoverished families who labor on large scale farms · To Support Water Projects-Clean Water Access · Clean Water-Nouna Burkina Faso

South Asia$125k · 5% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: To Support Education in Afghanistan

Russia and Neighboring States$50k · 2% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: UKRAINE RELIEF

How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s 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.
03Its field
04the grantee network

5 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 5 of the 6 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
5/5
Grantees still filing
3/5
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Global Solidarity Fund: $4,583,333 · InternationalGlobal Solidarity FundGlobal Impact: $2,700,000 · InternationalGlobal Impact+1 more: $25,000 · InternationalTHE TASK FORCE FOR GLOBAL HEALTH INC: $844,898 · Human ServicesTHE TASK FO…+1 more: $13,600 · Human ServicesCATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICES: $25,000 · Other
International$7,308,333Human Services$858,498Other$25,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetGlobal Solidarity Fund: $4,583,333 over 3y, 61% of budgetGlobal Impact: $2,700,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetTHE TASK FORCE FOR GLOBAL HEALTH INC: $844,898 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetCHRISTIAN CONNECTIONS FOR INTERNATIONAL HEALTH: $25,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetNATIONAL COUNCIL OF THE US SOCIETY OF ST VINCENT DE PAUL INC: $13,600 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Ascension Health Global Mission funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ascension Health Global Mission. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Ascension Health Global Mission?

    Find your warmest path to Ascension Health Global Mission 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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 6 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Ascension Health Global Mission’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home