Skip to content
Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation

The ELIZABETH GLASER PEDIATRIC AIDS FOUNDATION (egpaf) is a proven leader in the fight against pediatric hiv/aids and has reached over 33 million pregnant women with services to prevent transmission of hiv to their babies.

$19M
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$236k
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.

International$3.9MHealth$3.1MCrime & Legal$236kEducation$229k
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $235,936, the rows itemized in this filing. The $18,855,361 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $18,619,425 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.
$235,936
Median grant
1
States reached
$38M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NO MEANS NO WORLDWIDE$235,936
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 14%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 78% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%Partners In Health: $388k → 16%Project Concern International: $48k → 11%EngenderHealth Inc: $823k → 17%ENGENDERHEALTH INC: $941k → 14%CARE International Malawi: $339k → 13%University of Washington: $53k → 9%NO MEANS NO WORLDWIDE: $467k → 6%Partners In Health: $323k → 16%EngenderHealth Inc: $656k → 17%Population Services International: $279k → 14%CARE International Malawi: $169k → 13%NO MEANS NO WORLDWIDE: $339k → 6%PARTNERS IN HEALTH: $236k → 16%EngenderHealth Inc: $451k → 17%No Means No Worldwide: $260k → 6%D-Tree International: $153k → 16%International Rescue Committee (IRC): $292k → 17%No Means No Worldwide: $252k → 6%D-Tree International: $53k → 16%International Rescue Committee: $271k → 17%NO MEANS NO WORLDWIDE: $236k → 6%International Rescue Committee (IRC): $221k → 17%NO MEANS NO WORLDWIDE: $48k → 6%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

WA
NY
MA
CA
NE
VA
NM
DC
GA

Grants abroad, by region: $18M on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Sub-Saharan Africa$18M · 100% · 115 grants

Stated purpose: TO FURTHER PMTCT AND CARE AND TREATMENT SERVICES TO CHILDREN AND FAMILIES.

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$7.1M · 7 repeat orgs$380k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +91% since the first grant, against -48% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
3

Total granted

$7.1M
$380k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+91%
-48%

Still filing today

86%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’22’23’24
InternationalHealthCrime & LegalOther
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

  • NM
    NO MEANS NO WORLDWIDE
    7× · 2018–2024 · $1.6M · revenue +165% · 30% of their budget
  • PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION
    3× · 2018–2020 · $947k · revenue +91%
  • IR
    International Rescue Committee INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $784k · revenue +81%

Funded once

  • PS
    POPULATION SERVICES INTERNATIONAL
    one grant, 2017 · $279k · revenue -48%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON
    one grant, 2017 · $53k
  • PC
    PROJECT CONCERN INTERNATIONAL
    one grant, 2019 · $48k · revenue -94%
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
Direct Action for Women Now World-Wide Inc Formerly Indias Daughters Inc
Philanthropy
2
Project Hope - the People-to-People Health Foundation Inc

To conduct and support programs and activities aimed at solving some of the world's greatest public health challenges, with a specific focus on enabling health workers to have the greatest possible impact on the health of the people they…

International
3
Pathfinder International

Pathfinder expands access to sexual and reproductive health services, opening the door to opportunities for women and all individuals to thrive-economically, educationally, and civically. driven by our country-led leadership and local…

International
4
Global Strategies

Global Strategies empowers communities in the most neglected areas of the world to improve the lives of women and children through healthcare.

Health
5
Intrahealth International Inc

Our mission is to improve the performance of health workers and strengthen the systems in which they work.

Health
6
Management Sciences for Health Inc

(msh) saves lives and improves the health of the world's poorest (see schedule o) and most vulnerable people by closing the gap between knowledge and action in public health.

International
7
International Medical Corps

To save lives & relieve suffering through health interventions & related activities that strengthen communities affected by conflict, natural disasters & disease outbreaks.

International
8
Circle of Health International

COHIs mission is to work with women and their communities in times of crisis and disaster to ensure access to quality reproductive, maternal and newborn care. See Sch O for full mission.

—
9
Health in Harmony

Health in Harmony's mission is to reverse tropical rainforest deforestation for planetary health.

Health
10
Herhealtheq Corp

Delivering devices and equipment to mid-to-low income countries, to target the prevention and detection of non-communicable diseases. This is specifically focused on impacting the lives of women.

International
11
International Center for Research On Women

The international center for research for women (icrw) is a global research institute, with a mission to advance rights and opportunities for women, girls, and structurally excluded populations with actionable evidence and solutions.

International
12
Catalyst Global

Catalyst Global (formerly known as WCG Cares) is an international non-profit organization committed to increasing access to innovative, high-quality, affordable sexual and reproductive health products and services to facilitate the vibrant…

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Engenderhealth Inc; the most unlike its peers is Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation. 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

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 10 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ENGENDERHEALTH INC: $2,869,867 · InternationalENGENDERHEALTH INCInternational Rescue Committee INC: $784,217 · InternationalInternational Rescue Committee INCCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC: $507,891 · InternationalCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC+1 more: $48,497 · InternationalNO MEANS NO WORLDWIDE: $1,601,832 · Crime & LegalNO MEANS NO WORLDWIDEPARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $946,616 · HealthPARTNERS IN HEALT…D-TREE INTERNATIONAL INC: $205,670 · HealthD-TREE INTERNATIO…POPULATION SERVICES INTERNATIONAL: $278,594 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO: $176,043 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON: $52,882 · Other
International$4,210,472Crime & Legal$1,601,832Health$1,152,286Other$507,519

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 budgetENGENDERHEALTH INC: $2,869,867 over 5y, 3.4% of budgetNO MEANS NO WORLDWIDE: $1,601,832 over 7y, 30% of budgetPARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $946,616 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $784,217 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC: $507,891 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPOPULATION SERVICES INTERNATIONAL: $278,594 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetD-TREE INTERNATIONAL INC: $205,670 over 2y, 9.7% of budgetPROJECT CONCERN INTERNATIONAL: $48,497 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.

Vanguard Charitable E…Amazonsmile Foundation
Vanguard Charitable Endowment ProgramPA10× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
3report 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 10 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 Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS’ 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