Skip to content
Association of Women's Health Obstetric & Neonatal Nurses at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Association of Women's Health Obstetric & Neonatal Nurses

To improve and promote the health of women and newborns and to strengthen the nursing profession through the delivery of superior advocacy, research, education and other professional and clinical resources to nurses and other health care professionals.

$32k
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$8k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its 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, FY2019 to 2024.

Education$76kScience & Tech$59kHealth$30k
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $24,999, the rows itemized in this filing. The $32,203 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $7,204 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.
$8,333
Median grant
3
States reached
$16M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE MGH INSTITUTE OF HEALTH PROFESSIONS INC$8,333
UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA$8,333
UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH$8,333
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 (FY19–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 85% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA: $8k → 15%TRUSTEES OF BOSTON COLLEGE: $15k → 7%THE MGH INSTITUTE OF HEALTH PROFESSIONS INC: $8k → 16%UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH: $8k → 11%NEW MEXICO UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $10k → 23%FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY: $5k → 11%WESTERN CAROLINA UNIVERSITY: $8k → 18%KENNEASAW STATE UNIVERISTY RESEARCH AND SERVICE FOUNDATION: $6k → 8%UNIVERSITY OF NORTH GEORGIA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $7k → 12%INDIANA UNIVERSITY: $6k → 18%THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY OFFICE OF SPONSORED PROGRAMS: $10k → 15%LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO: $10k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF NORTH DAKOTA: $11k → 13%TOWSON UNIVERSITY: $10k → 11%THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY OFFICE OF SPONSORED PROGRAMS: $6k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH: $5k → 11%LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO: $10k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

ND
IL
NY
MA
IN
OH
PA
MD
AZ
NM
NC
GA
FL
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 8% of Association of Women's Health Obstetric & Neonatal Nurses’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Association of Women's Health Obstetric & Neonatal Nurseslessmore 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 field
05the grantee network

6 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. 6 of the 16 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/6
Grantees still filing
6/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $16,000 · OtherTHE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITYUniversity of North Dakota-College of Business & Public Admin: $11,000 · OtherUniversity of North Dakota-College of Business & Public Ad…UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND COLLEGE PARK: $10,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND COLLEGE PARKUNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA: $8,333 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF ARIZONAMASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORATED: $8,333 · OtherMASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORATEDWESTERN CAROLINA UNIVERSITY: $8,050 · OtherWESTERN CAROLINA UNIVERSITYUNIVERSITY OF NORTH GEORGIA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INCORPORATED: $7,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF NORTH GEORGIA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INCORPORAT…THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS: $6,000 · OtherTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOISIndiana University School of Medicine: $5,950 · OtherIndiana University School of MedicineFLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY: $5,000 · OtherFLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITYLOYOLA UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO: $30,000 · EducationLOYOLA UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGOTRUSTEES OF BOSTON COLLEGE: $15,000 · EducationTRUSTEES OF BOSTON COLLEGEUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH: $13,333 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGHTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK: $10,000 · EducationTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW…KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH AND SERVICE FOUNDATION INC: $6,000 · EducationKENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH AND SERVICE FOUNDAT…The George Washington University: $6,000 · EducationThe George Washington University
Other$85,666Education$80,333

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

25%50%75%100%$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetLOYOLA UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO: $30,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTRUSTEES OF BOSTON COLLEGE: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH: $13,333 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH AND SERVICE FOUNDATION INC: $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetThe George Washington University: $6,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds LOYOLA UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO ↗
  • Who funds TRUSTEES OF BOSTON COLLEGE ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH ↗
  • Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
  • Who funds KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH AND SERVICE FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds The George Washington University ↗

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.

National Collegiate A…American Chemical Soc…
National Collegiate Athletic AssociationIN15.6× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Collegiate Athletic Association · American Chemical Society

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 of Women's Health Obstetric & Neonatal Nurses funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Association of Women's Health Obstetric & Neonatal Nurses. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Trustees of Boston College: 2% of 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 · 0–75%
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 16 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 of Women's Health Obstetric & Neonatal Nurses’ 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