How much did Association of American Medical Colleges grant in FY2025?

Health$4.2MEducation$1.1MEnvironment$830kHousing & Shelter$610kHuman Services$408kPublic Benefit$242kFood & Nutrition$212kYouth Development$205kOther$0

02FY2025 · 34 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

Under $10k3 grants · $27k
$10k–50k24 grants · $336k
$50k–250k7 grants · $736k

$15,000

Median grant

States reached

$697M

Total assets

Largest grants
Recipient	Amount
ALBANY STATE UNIVERSITY	$186,843
OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY	$150,000
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES	$117,500
NATIONAL MEDICAL FELLOWSHIPS INC	$95,000
TREES ATLANTA INC	$81,520
NATIONAL BOARD OF MEDICAL EXAMINERS	$54,818
COALITION TO PROTECT AMERICAN'S HEALTHCARE	$50,000
REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANSISCO	$25,000
FOUNDATION FOR BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH	$25,000
HIPS	$16,500
CALVARY WOMEN'S SERVICES INC	$16,500
COMMUNITY OF HOPE	$16,500
FOOD & FRIENDS	$16,500
TRANSITIONAL HOUSING CORPORATION	$16,500
HOUSE OF RUTH	$16,500

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $573k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$6.2M · 68 repeat orgs$2.0M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +30% since the first grant, against +16% for the ones you funded once.

68 repeat relationships — 22 still active in FY2025, 46 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$6.2M

$1.6M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+30%

+16%

Still filing today

84%

71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 61% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $420k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EducationHealthHuman ServicesHousing & ShelterFood & NutritionScience & TechOther

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

NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
8× · 2018–2025 · $1.4M · revenue +21%
NATIONAL MEDICAL FELLOWSHIPS INC
5× · 2020–2025 · $531k · revenue +22%
CT
COALITION TO STRENGTHEN AMERICA'S HEALTH CARE
8× · 2018–2025 · $475k · revenue +917%

Funded once

CF
CITIZENS FOR TRUTH IN DRUG PRICING INC
one grant, 2018 · $500k
COLUMBIA LAND TRUST
one grant, 2024 · $81k · revenue 0%
3H
340B Health
one grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue +6%

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

04Your field

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.

University of Maryland Anesthesiology Associates Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

—

Morehouse School of Medicine

Leading the creation and advancement of health equity we exist to improve the health and well-being of individuals and communities, increase the diversity of the health professional and scientific workforce, and address primary health care…

Education

University of Maryland Otorhino-Laryngology-Head & Neck Surgery Pa

Health

University of Maryland Physicians Pa

—

University of Maryland Neurosurgeryassociates Pa

Education

University of Maryland Eye Associates Pa

Health

University of Maryland Pediatric Associates Pa

Health

University of Maryland Dermatologists Pa

Health

University of Maryland Oncology Associates Pa

Health

University of Maryland Surgical Associates Pa

Health

University of Maryland Family Medicine Associates Pa

—

University of Maryland Neurology Associates Pa

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Medical Fellowships Inc and the most unlike its peers is Friends of the Health & Human Services Academy. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 41 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.7% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.7%1/144

the rest of the field

12%

1,600/12,857

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.

04the grantee network

116 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. 116 of the 144 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.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

113/116

Grantees still filing

92/116

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$2,771,892Health$1,950,645Science & Tech$1,477,499Education$890,486Human Services$572,611Housing & Shelter$385,461Public Benefit$186,843

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.

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.

Greater Washington Community FoundationDC53.7× affinity34 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Greater Washington Community Foundation · The Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation · United Way of the National Capital Area · Philip L Graham Fund co Graham Holdings Company · World Bank Community Connections Fund · Clark-Winchcole Foundation · Georgetown University · American Medical Association · John Edward Fowler Memorial Foundation · Eugene & Agnes E Meyer Foundation · William S Abell Foundation Inc · The George Washington University

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 Association of American Medical Colleges 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24’25

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

1get no government money at all

27report 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

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.

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 camps

funders cluster by geography, not ideology

By state

where grant money is based, and what stays home

State money flows

the interactive map of money crossing state lines