Skip to content
Engenderhealth Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Engenderhealth Inc

Engenderhealth envisions a gender-equal world where all people have the agency, resources, and opportunities to live healthy lives.(see schedule o)

$9.6M
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$3.0M
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 2025.

Health$17MInternational$4.8MEducation$541kCommunity Improvement$98kArts & Culture$32kRecreation & Sports$10k
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $4,560,974, the rows itemized in this filing. The $9,623,027 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $5,062,053 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $30k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $181k
  • $250k+3 grants · $4.3M
$86,602
Median grant
6
States reached
$34M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
INTRAHEALTH INTERNATIONAL INC$3,014,828
JSI RESEARCH AND TRAINING INSTITUTE INC$755,965
PATHFINDER INTERNATIONAL$566,176
HUMENTUM INC$94,237
UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA$86,602
SOCCER WITHOUT BORDERS (SWB)$14,986
JOHN HOPKINS CENTER FOR COMMUNICATION PROGRAMS (CCP) (JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERS$14,948
INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE INC$6,905
YOUTH DEVELOPMENT LABS INC$6,327
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 (FY17–20, $999k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 13% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%HEAL AFRICA: $134k → 11%CHILD TRENDS: $259k → 8%CHILD TRENDS: $206k → 8%Child Trends: $200k → 8%CHILD TRENDS: $199k → 8%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

MI
NY
MA
CA
MD
NC
DC
TX

Grants abroad, by region: $5.1M on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 3 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Sub-Saharan Africa$4.0M · 79% · 30 grants

Stated purpose: SEXUAL AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH & RIGHTS

South Asia$992k · 20% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: SEXUAL AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH & RIGHTS

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$93k · 2% · 3 grants

Stated purpose: SEXUAL AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH & RIGHTS

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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$21M · 8 repeat orgs$533k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
10

Total granted

$21M
$504k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-29%
+15%

Still filing today

88%
60%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $28k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthInternationalHuman ServicesEducationArts & CultureRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • II
    INTRAHEALTH INTERNATIONAL INC
    5× · 2021–2025 · $13M · revenue -79%
  • PI
    PATHFINDER INTERNATIONAL
    5× · 2021–2025 · $3.5M · revenue -27%
  • JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
    5× · 2021–2025 · $2.3M · revenue +40%

Funded once

  • HA
    HEAL AFRICA USA
    one grant, 2018 · $134k · revenue +19% · 43% of their budget
  • WM
    Weill Medical College of Cornell Univers
    one grant, 2017 · $106k
  • CS
    CARDEA SERVICESgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $98k · revenue +31%
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
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
2
Ibis Reproductive Health Inc

Ibis reproductive health drives change through bold, rigorous research and principled partnerships that advance sexual and reproductive autonomy, choices and health worldwide.

Health
3
International Aids Vaccine Initiative Inc

A global nonprofit biomedical research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.

International
4
Path

Path makes good health more accessible in 70+ countries by improving the health care people receive, creating affordable health products, and advancing effective health policies. across all our projects and programs, (continued on schedule…

International
5
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
6
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
7
Engenderhealth Inc

Engenderhealth envisions a gender-equal world where all people have the agency, resources, and opportunities to live healthy lives.(see schedule o)

International
8
Center for Global Development

Reduce global poverty and improve lives through innovative economic research that drives better policy and practice by the world's top decision makers. we focus on the intersection of developing countries and the governments, institutions…

Human Services
9
Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation

Partners In Health (PIH) is a non-profit, global health organization that fights social injustice by bringing the benefits of modern medical science first and foremost to the most vulnerable communities worldwide. In Haiti, Malawi, Rwanda,…

Health
10
Guttmacher Institute Inc

The institute is a leading research and policy organization committed to advancing sexual and reproductive health and rights worldwide.

—
11
International Development Enterprises

See schedule o for a more detailed description of ide's mission statement and achievements.

International
12
International Partnership for Microbicides Inc

To develop hiv prevention products and other sexual and reproductive health technologies for women, and to make them available and accessible where they are urgently needed.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Child Trends Inc; the most unlike its peers is International Rescue Committee Inc. 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

18 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. 18 of the 22 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/18
Grantees still filing
7/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

INTRAHEALTH INTERNATIONAL INC: $12,806,025 · HealthINTRAHEALTH INTERNATIONAL INC+4 more: $135,869 · HealthPATHFINDER INTERNATIONAL: $3,539,124 · InternationalPATHFINDER INTERNATIO…THE POPULATION COUNCIL INC: $640,569 · InternationalTHE POPULATION COUNCI…+2 more: $13,232 · InternationalJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $2,285,096 · EducationJOHNS HOPKIN…President and Fellows of Harvard College: $132,475 · EducationPresident an…JSI RESEARCH & TRAINING INSTITUTE INC: $857,413 · OtherHUMENTUM INC: $286,970 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL: $118,257 · OtherWeill Medical College of Cornell Univers: $105,590 · OtherINTERNET SEXUALITY INFORMATION SERVICES: $86,765 · Other+2 more: $35,025 · OtherCHILD TRENDS INC: $864,459 · Human ServicesHEAL AFRICA USA: $134,163 · Human ServicesSOCCER WITHOUT BORDERS: $14,986 · Recreation & SportsStoryCenter: $6,920 · Arts & Culture
Health$12,941,894International$4,192,925Education$2,417,571Other$1,490,020Human Services$998,622Recreation & Sports$14,986Arts & Culture$6,920

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 budgetINTRAHEALTH INTERNATIONAL INC: $12,806,025 over 5y, 15% of budgetPATHFINDER INTERNATIONAL: $3,539,124 over 5y, 1.1% of budgetJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $2,285,096 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetCHILD TRENDS INC: $864,459 over 4y, 1.1% of budgetJSI RESEARCH & TRAINING INSTITUTE INC: $857,413 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetTHE POPULATION COUNCIL INC: $640,569 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetHUMENTUM INC: $286,970 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetHEAL AFRICA USA: $134,163 over 1y, 43% of budgetPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $132,475 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINTERNET SEXUALITY INFORMATION SERVICES: $86,765 over 1y, 6.1% of budgetPEOPLE'S COMMUNITY CLINIC INC: $16,722 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER TEXAS INC: $15,147 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSOCCER WITHOUT BORDERS: $14,986 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetStoryCenter: $6,920 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $6,905 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYOUTH DEVELOPMENT LABS INC: $6,327 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetACOG FOUNDATION: $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.

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.

Gates FoundationJohns Hopkins Univers…Family Health Interna…Jsi Research & Traini…The David and Lucile …Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Gates FoundationWA15× affinity5 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Gates Foundation · Johns Hopkins University · Family Health International Inc · Jsi Research & Training Institute Inc · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Engenderhealth Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Engenderhealth 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 →median 50%
  • Jsi Research & Training Institute Inc: 69% of income from government
  • Child Trends Inc: 50% of income from government
  • Johns Hopkins University: 12% of income from government
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College: 7% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
2rely 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 22 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Engenderhealth’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