Skip to content
Association for Community Affiliated Plans at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Association for Community Affiliated Plans

The ASSOCIATION FOR COMMUNITY AFFILIATED PLANS (acap) is the national trade association which represents not-for-profit safety net health plans.

$86k
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$60k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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.

Health$517kPhilanthropy$50kFood & Nutrition$10k
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $82,500, the rows itemized in this filing. The $85,731 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $3,231 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

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $15k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $60k
$15,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$11M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
KEEP AMERICANS COVERED$60,000
ALLIANCE FOR HEALTH POLICY$15,000
THE NATIONAL ACADEMY FOR STATE HEALTH POLICY$7,500
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 98% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%ABLE TO INC: $50k → 17%KEEP AMERICANS COVERED: $60k → 14%MEALS ON WHEELS AMERICA: $10k → 7%NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MEDICAID DIRECTORS: $15k → 23%ALLIANCE FOR HEALTH POLICY: $25k → 14%NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MEDICAID DIRECTORS: $11k → 23%ALLIANCE FOR HEALTH POLICY: $25k → 14%NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MEDICAID DIRECTORS: $11k → 23%ALLIANCE FOR HEALTH REFORM: $18k → 14%NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MEDICAID DIRECTORS: $10k → 23%ALLIANCE FOR HEALTH POLICY: $15k → 14%NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MEDICAID DIRECTORS: $9k → 23%ALLIANCE FOR HEALTH POLICY: $15k → 14%ALLIANCE FOR HEALTH POLICY: $15k → 14%NATIONAL COALITION ON HEALTH CARE: $10k → 14%NATIONAL COALITION ON HEALTH CARE: $10k → 14%NATIONAL COALITION ON HEALTH CARE: $10k → 14%NATIONAL COALITION ON HEALTH CARE: $10k → 14%NATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE: $9k → 14%THE FAIRNESS PROJECT: $50k → 14%NATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE: $8k → 14%THE FAIRNESS PROJECT: $25k → 14%NATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE: $8k → 14%THE FAIRNESS PROJECT: $25k → 14%DAVID A WINSTON HEALTH POLICY FELLOW: $6k → 14%THE FAIRNESS PROJECT: $25k → 14%DAVID A WINSTON HEALTH POLICY FELLOWSHIP: $6k → 14%THE FAIRNESS PROJECT: $10k → 14%DAVID A WINSTON HEALTH POLICY FELLOWSHIP: $6k → 14%HOPEWELL FUND: $50k → 14%ALLIANCE FOR HEALTH POLICY: $15k → 14%THE NATIONAL ACADEMY FOR STATE HEALTH POLICY: $8k → 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.
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 6% of Association for Community Affiliated Plans’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Association for Community Affiliated Planslessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$399k · 6 repeat orgs$128k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +41% since the first grant, against -33% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
2

Total granted

$399k
$60k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+41%
-33%

Still filing today

83%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 18% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $68k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’22’24
HealthHousing & ShelterFood & NutritionOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • TF
    THE FAIRNESS PROJECT
    5× · 2018–2022 · $135k · revenue +424%
  • NA
    National Association of Medicaid Directors
    6× · 2017–2023 · $55k · revenue +112%
  • NATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE
    3× · 2017–2019 · $24k · revenue +41%

Funded once

  • AT
    ABLE TO INC
    one grant, 2018 · $50k
  • MO
    MEALS ON WHEELS AMERICA
    one grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue -33%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
National Alliance of Healthcare Purchaser Coalitions Inc

To accelerate the nation's progress towards safe, efficient, high - quality health care and the improved health status of the american population.

—
2
National Alliance for Care At Home

The association represents and advocates for home health agencies, hospices, and home care providers across the united states. it advances high quality, accessible home based care through federal and regulatory advocacy, professional…

—
3
America's Health Insurance Plans Inc

Ahip is the national trade association representing the health insurance industry. ahip's members provide health care coverage, services and solutions to more than 200 million americans. we are committed to market-based solutions and…

Membership Benefit
4
Consumer Healthcare Products Association

Empower self-care by preserving and expanding choice and availability of consumer healthcare products.

—
5
American College Health Association

The american college health association (acha) serves as the principal leadership organization for advancing the health of college students and campus communities through advocacy, education, and research.

Health
6
Consumer Health Coalition

Consumer Health Coalition (CHC) is dedicated to inspiring a consumer movement to advance the health and enhance access to quality and affordable healthcare. We further our mission by targeting populations that are at risk for experiencing…

Health
7
Fair Health Inc

Fair health is a national independent, not-for-profit corporation whose mission is to supply objective, unbiased information for all stakeholders to improve healthcare quality, access and affordability.

Health
8
National Health Council Inc

To provide a united voice for people with chronic diseases and disabilities.

—
9
Kansas Healthcare Collaborative Inc

Engaging and aligning providers and stakeholders to establish Kansas as a role model for health care quality and a top performer in health care outcomes.

Health
10
Healthcare Access Maryland Inc

We are making maryland healthier by connecting residents to insurance and care, educating the community about healthier living, and advocating a more equitable health care system.

Health
11
National Association of Chronic Disease Directors

The National Association of Chronic Disease Directors (NACDD) is a national public health association of chronic disease directors. Its mission is to improve the health of the public by strengthening state-based leadership and expertise…

Crime & Legal
12
Medicaid Health Plans of America

To develop and advance public policy that controls costs and improves access and delivery of quality health care to medicaid members.

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Center for Health Policy Development; the most unlike its peers is National Association of Medicaid Directors. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

10 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. 10 of the 11 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/10
Grantees still filing
5/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Alliance for Health Policy: $127,500 · HealthAlliance for Health PolicyNational Association of Medicaid Directors: $55,000 · HealthNational Association of Medicaid DirectorsNATIONAL COALITION ON HEALTH CARE: $40,000 · HealthNATIONAL COALITION ON HEALTH CARENATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE: $23,500 · HealthNATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR QUALITY ASSURANCEDAVID A WINSTON HEALTH POLICY FELLOWSHIP: $18,000 · HealthDAVID A WINSTON HEALTH POLICY FELLOWSHIPTHE FAIRNESS PROJECT: $135,000 · Housing & ShelterTHE FAIRNESS PROJECTKEEP AMERICANS COVERED: $60,000 · OtherKEEP AMERICANS COVEREDABLE TO INC: $50,000 · OtherABLE TO INCCENTER FOR HEALTH POLICY DEVELOPMENT: $7,500 · OtherCENTER FOR HEALTH POLIC…HOPEWELL FUND: $50,000 · PhilanthropyHOPEWELL …MEALS ON WHEELS AMERICA: $10,000 · Food & Nutrition
Health$264,000Housing & Shelter$135,000Other$117,500Philanthropy$50,000Food & Nutrition$10,000

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 budgetTHE FAIRNESS PROJECT: $135,000 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetAlliance for Health Policy: $127,500 over 7y, 1.1% of budgetNational Association of Medicaid Directors: $55,000 over 6y, 0.6% of budgetHOPEWELL FUND: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL COALITION ON HEALTH CARE: $40,000 over 4y, 2.2% of budgetNATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE: $23,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetDAVID A WINSTON HEALTH POLICY FELLOWSHIP: $18,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS AMERICA: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCENTER FOR HEALTH POLICY DEVELOPMENT: $7,500 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.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

The Commonwealth FundPharmaceutical Resear…Kaiser Foundation Hea…California Healthcare…Gordon E and Betty I …AARP
The Commonwealth FundNY15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Commonwealth Fund · Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America · Kaiser Foundation Health Plan Inc · California Healthcare Foundation · Gordon E and Betty I Moore Foundation · AARP

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Association for Community Affiliated Plans funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Association for Community Affiliated Plans. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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.

    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 11 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 Association for Community Affiliated Plans’ 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