Skip to content
California Consortium for Urban Indian Health Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

California Consortium for Urban Indian Health Inc

The mission of ccuih is to facilitate shared development resources for our members and to raise public awareness in order to support a health and wellness network that meets the needs of american indians living in urban communities in california.

$146k
Granted FY2022
6
Grants FY2022
1
States reached
$30k
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, FY2019 to 2022.

Health$835k
02FY2022 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 6 grants below total $118,600, the rows itemized in this filing. The $145,623 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $27,023 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 · FY2022

  • Under $10k1 grant · $6k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $113k
$20,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
United American Indian Involv$30,000
Friendship House Association$30,000
Native American Health Center$20,000
Fresno American Indian Health$20,000
California Pan-Ethnic Health$12,600
Indian Health Ctr Santa Clara$6,000
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 (FY19–22, $113k) 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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%UNITED AMERICAN INDIAN INVOLV: $55k → 14%United American Indian Involv: $30k → 14%UNITED AMERICAN INDIAN INVOLV: $28k → 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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$782k · 7 repeat orgs$52k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2022, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
2

Total granted

$782k
$34k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+113%
+1348%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $19k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22
HealthHuman ServicesPhilanthropyOther
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

  • FH
    Friendship House Association of American Indians Inc
    4× · 2019–2022 · $143k · revenue +113%
  • ND
    NATIVE DIRECTIONS INC
    3× · 2019–2021 · $133k · revenue +270%
  • FA
    FRESNO AMERICAN INDIAN HEALTH PROJECT
    4× · 2019–2022 · $133k · revenue +204%

Funded once

  • SN
    SACRAMENTO NATIVE AMERICAN HEALTH CENTERgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $28k · revenue +80%
  • PA
    Peggy and Jack Baskin Foundationgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $6k · revenue ×14
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
Feather River Tribal Health Inc

To elevate the health status of the American Indian people in our service area and all people in our communities to the highest level possible through a comprehensive system of preventive and therapeutic services.

Health
2
Northern Valley Indian Health Inc

To provide health services to eligible american indians in the service areas of Glenn and Yolo counties and portions of Colusa, Butte and Tehama counties. Medical and dental services are provided to the general community as well.

Health
3
American Indian Health & Services

To promote and provide quality services to improve the health and well-being of American Indians/Alaska Natives and other community members.

Arts & Culture
4
California Consortium for Urban Indian Health

The mission of ccuih is to facilitate shared development resources for our members and to raise public awareness in order to support a health and wellness network that meets the needs of american indians living in urban communities in…

—
5
Southern Indian Health Council

Southern Indian Health Council is a Native American organization committed to protecting and improving the physical, mental, and spiritual health of our American Indian Community. We provide a comprehensive range of wellness, health care,…

Health
6
Native Healing Llc
Animals
7
Lake County Tribal Health Consortium Inc

To provide complete medical and dental care to Native Americans in the area of Lake County, California.

Unclassified
8
The Center for Native Health Inc

Integrate community-based traditional knowledge into all facets of Native health care and education and to promote wellness and balance for Indigenous peoples.

Education
9
Mact Health Board Incorporated American Indian Tribal Organization

Mact health board provides medical outpatient, dental, and behavioral health services to native americans and other communities of alpine, mariposa, amador, calaveras, and tuolumne counties.

Health
10
Asian Pacific Health Care Venture Inc

Asian Pacific Health Care Venture, Inc. is a family of community health centers whose mission is to be the medical home for our patients by providing personalized, quality health care services in a culturally accessible manner.

—
11
Chapa-De Indian Health Program Inc

Provides comprehensive health care and ancillary services to the native-american population of sierra, placer, and nevada counties of california.

Health
12
All Inclusive Community Health Cent

The organization provides health care and other related services to medically underserved populations in Los Angeles County.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Indian Health Center of Santa Clara Valley; the most unlike its peers is Peggy and Jack Baskin Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

11 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.

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

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
10/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Friendship House Association of American Indians Inc: $143,165 · HealthFriendship House Association of American Indians IncFRESNO AMERICAN INDIAN HEALTH PROJECT: $133,165 · HealthFRESNO AMERICAN INDIAN HEALTH PROJECTBakersfield American Indian Health Project Inc: $83,164 · HealthBakersfield American Indian Health Project IncSAN DIEGO AMERICAN INDIAN HEALTH CENTER: $73,164 · HealthSAN DIEGO AMERICAN INDIAN HEALTH CENTERSACRAMENTO NATIVE AMERICAN HEALTH CENTER: $27,842 · HealthSACRAMENTO NATIVE AMERICAN HEALTH CENTER+2 more: $18,600 · HealthNATIVE DIRECTIONS INC: $133,167 · OtherNATIVE DIRECTIONS INCNative American Health Center Inc: $103,164 · OtherNative American Health Center In…UNITED AMERICAN INDIAN INVOLVEMENT INC: $113,164 · Human ServicesUNITED AMERICAN…Peggy and Jack Baskin Foundation: $6,000 · Philanthropy
Health$479,100Other$236,331Human Services$113,164Philanthropy$6,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFriendship House Association of American Indians Inc: $143,165 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetNATIVE DIRECTIONS INC: $133,167 over 3y, 5.3% of budgetFRESNO AMERICAN INDIAN HEALTH PROJECT: $133,165 over 4y, 1.7% of budgetUNITED AMERICAN INDIAN INVOLVEMENT INC: $113,164 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetNative American Health Center Inc: $103,164 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetBakersfield American Indian Health Project Inc: $83,164 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetSAN DIEGO AMERICAN INDIAN HEALTH CENTER: $73,164 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetSACRAMENTO NATIVE AMERICAN HEALTH CENTER: $27,842 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCalifornia Pan-Ethnic Health Network: $12,600 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetINDIAN HEALTH CENTER OF SANTA CLARA VALLEY: $6,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPeggy and Jack Baskin Foundation: $6,000 over 1y, 0.9% 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.

National Council of U…Kaiser Foundation Hos…California Physicians…Direct ReliefSierra Health Foundat…California Healthcare…The California Wellne…Amazonsmile Foundation
National Council of Urban Indian HealthDC20× affinity7 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Council of Urban Indian Health · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · California Physicians' Service Fdn Dba Blue Shield of California Fdn · Direct Relief · Sierra Health Foundation Center for Health Program Management · California Healthcare Foundation · The California Wellness Foundation · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 California Consortium for Urban Indian Health Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from California Consortium for Urban Indian Health Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%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.

    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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2022, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on California Consortium for Urban Indian Health’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