Skip to content
District Medical Group Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

District Medical Group Inc

We are dedicated to improving the health and well-being of individuals in arizona through an integrated medical group practice based on a balanced program of patient care, education, research, and community service.

$1.4M
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$1.2M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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$3.3MEducation$375k
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $6k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $160k
  • $250k+1 grant · $1.2M
$160,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$117M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
VALLEYWISE HEALTH FOUNDATION$1,175,000
CREIGHTON UNIVERSITY$160,000
NATIONAL KIDNEY FOUNDATION OF ARIZONA$5,500
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 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%VALLEYWISE HEALTH FOUNDATION: $1.2M → 11%UA FOUNDATION: $20k → 15%CREIGHTON UNIVERSITY: $10k → 12%CITY OF HOPE: $5k → 14%MARCH OF DIMES: $10k → 7%VALLEYWISE HEALTH FOUNDATION: $625k → 11%UA FOUNDATION: $19k → 15%CREIGHTON UNIVERSITY: $10k → 12%MARICOPA HEALTH FOUNDATION: $53k → 11%UA FOUNDATION: $18k → 15%CREIGHTON UNIVERSITY: $160k → 12%MARICOPAVALLEYWISE HEALTH FOUNDATION: $48k → 11%UA FOUNDATION: $18k → 15%CREIGHTON UNIVERSITY: $90k → 12%MARICOPA HEALTH FOUNDATION: $42k → 11%UA FOUNDATION: $15k → 15%MARICOPAVALLEYWISE HEALTH FOUNDATION: $35k → 11%UA FOUNDATION: $15k → 15%VALLEYWISE HEALTH FOUNDATION: $26k → 11%VALLEYWISE HEALTH FOUNDATION: $25k → 11%CREIGHTON UNIVERSITY ARIZONA HEALTH EDUCATION ALLIANCE: $10k → 11%MARICOPA COUNTY SPECIAL HEALTHCARE DISTRICT: $481k → 11%ARIZONA BURN FOUNDATION: $10k → 11%ARIZONA BURN FOUNDATION: $8k → 11%NATIONAL KIDNEY FOUNDATION OF ARIZONA: $6k → 11%CREIGHTON UNIVERSITY ARIZONA HEALTH EDUCATION ALLIANCE: $325k → 11%CREIGHTON UNIVERSITY ARIZONA HEALTH EDUCATION ALLIANCE: $177k → 11%CREIGHTON UNIVERSITY ARIZONA HEALTH EDUCATION ALLIANCE: $129k → 11%CREIGHTON UNIVERSITY ARIZONA HEALTH EDUCATION ALLIANCE: $118k → 11%MARCH OF DIMES - ARIZONA CHAPTER: $5k → 11%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 7% of District Medical Group Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 92% of the giving stays in AZ; by stated purpose, 99%.

District Medical Group Inclessmore 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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.2M · 6 repeat orgs$492k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +109% since the first grant, against -33% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
2

Total granted

$3.2M
$486k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+109%
-33%

Still filing today

100%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthEducationOther
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

  • VH
    VALLEYWISE HEALTH FOUNDATION
    8× · 2017–2024 · $2.0M · revenue +370%
  • CU
    CREIGHTON UNIVERSITY ARIZONA HEALTH EDUCATION ALLIANCE
    5× · 2019–2023 · $759k · revenue ×22
  • CU
    Creighton University
    4× · 2021–2024 · $270k · revenue +25%

Funded once

  • VH
    VALLEYWISE HEALTH
    one grant, 2020 · $481k
  • CITY OF HOPE
    one grant, 2017 · $5k · 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
Banner -University Medical Group

Assist banner health complete its mission to make health care easier so life can be better by providing integrated & coordinated care & population health management.

Health
2
Arizona Hospital and Healthcare Foundation

Bringing together diverse voices to advance health and healthcare in arizona.

Health
3
Honorhealth

Honorhealth's mission is to improve the health and well-being of those we serve.

Health
4
American Academy of Neurology

The Academy's mission is to enhance member career fulfillment and promote brain health for all.

Community Improvement
5
Banner Health

Banner health's nonprofit mission is "making health care easier, so life can be better".

Health
6
City of Hope National Medical Center

City of Hope National Medical Center's mission is to make hope a reality for all touched by cancer and diabetes. PLEASE SEE SCHEDULE O FOR A CONTINUATION OF OUR MISSION

Health
7
Arizona Community Foundation

To lead, serve and collaborate to mobilize enduring philanthropy for a better arizona.

Philanthropy
8
Phoenix Children's Hospital Foundation

Phoenix children's hospital foundation supports phoenix children's hospital through fundraising ensuring that the hospital continues to stay on the leading edge of pediatric medicine and is equipped to fulfill its mission to advance hope,…

Health
9
The Dons of Arizona
Education
10
Arizona Healthiest State Foundation
—
11
University Health Inc

Primary functions are the coordination and delivery of health care resources and services, health care education for the hospital service area, long range analysis of health care needs and development of programs, and arranging for…

—
12
Arizona Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics

Azaap is committed to improving the health of arizona children and supporting the pediatric professionals who care for them.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of Arizona Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Arizona Burn Foundation Inc. 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

8 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. 8 of the 9 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
4/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

VALLEYWISE HEALTH FOUNDATION: $2,028,624 · HealthVALLEYWISE HEALTH FOUNDATIONCREIGHTON UNIVERSITY ARIZONA HEALTH EDUCATION ALLIANCE: $758,891 · HealthCREIGHTON UNIVERSITY ARIZONA HEALTH EDUCATION ALLIANCE+2 more: $20,000 · HealthVALLEYWISE HEALTH: $481,050 · OtherVALLEYWISE HEAL…ARIZONA BURN FOUNDATION INC: $18,000 · Other+1 more: $5,500 · OtherCreighton University: $270,000 · EducationCreighton U…University of Arizona Foundation: $104,500 · EducationUniversity …
Health$2,807,515Other$504,550Education$374,500

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 budgetVALLEYWISE HEALTH FOUNDATION: $2,028,624 over 8y, 9.1% of budgetCREIGHTON UNIVERSITY ARIZONA HEALTH EDUCATION ALLIANCE: $758,891 over 5y, 20% of budgetCreighton University: $270,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Arizona Foundation: $104,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetARIZONA BURN FOUNDATION INC: $18,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetMARCH OF DIMES INC: $15,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNational Kidney Foundation of Arizona: $5,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCITY OF HOPE: $5,000 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization District Medical Group Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from District Medical Group 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%6%13%19%25%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
    ⤢ 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to District Medical Group Inc?

    Find your warmest path to District Medical Group Inc 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 9 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 District Medical Group’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