· Public charity
Essential Access Health
Essential access advances reproductive equity and champions quality sexual and reproductive health care for everyone, everywhere.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k2 grants · $40k
- $50k–250k67 grants · $9.7M
- $250k+33 grants · $24M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF THE PACIFIC SOUTHWEST | $2,646,752 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD MAR MONTE | $2,426,439 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF LOS ANGELES | $2,150,171 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD ORANGE & SAN BERNARDINO | $1,830,750 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF PASEDENA AND SAN GABRIEL VALLEY | $1,602,761 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD NORTHERN CALIFORNIA | $1,295,062 |
| ACCESS REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE | $1,125,000 |
| FAMILY HEALTH CENTERS OF SAN DIEGO INC | $722,084 |
| BIRTHWORKERS OF COLOR COLLECTIVE | $620,000 |
| COUNTY OF LA DHS HARBOR UCLA MEDICAL CTR DEPT OF OBGYN | $600,000 |
| COUNTY OF LA DHS LAC USC MEDICAL CTR DEPT OF OBGYN | $600,000 |
| COUNTY OF LA DHS OLIVE VIEW MEDICAL CTR DEPT OF OBGYN | $600,000 |
| COUNTY OF LA DHS WOMEN'S HEALTH PROGRAM & INNOVATION | $550,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF CALIFORNIA CENTRAL COAST | $478,040 |
| FAMILY PLANNING ASSOCIATES MEDICAL GROUP | $475,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $5.1M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 78% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +69% since the first grant, against +62% for the ones you funded once.
135 repeat relationships — 91 still active in FY2024, 44 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $985k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF THE PACIFIC SOUTHWEST6× · 2017–2024 · $10M · revenue +104%
PLANNED PARENTHOOD MAR MONTE INC5× · 2017–2024 · $10M · revenue +37%
PLANNED PARENTHOOD LOS ANGELES8× · 2017–2024 · $8.0M · revenue +92%
Funded once
- DCDUPONT CLINICone grant, 2023 · $450k
CHINATOWN SERVICE CENTERgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $100k · revenue +62%- SCSTANISLAUS COUNTY LIBRARYone grant, 2017 · $95k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Provides primary care, oral health, and behavioral health care, including health education to the community without regard to the ability to pay for services.
Native American Health Center provides a continuum of medical, dental and behavioral health care, culturally responsive social and health programs and Women, Infants and Children (WIC) programs as well as other healthcare services,…
Provide comprehensive community health services to southern Alameda County.
Open Door Community Health Centers promotes social justice and human dignity through exceptional patient-centered care that improves the health and well-being of our patients, community, and staff.
The organization provides health care and other related services to medically underserved populations in Los Angeles County.
Redwoods Rural Health Center is a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) that provides primary, preventative healthcare services to all people without regard to social or economic status.
The organization is committed to the lifetime wellness of the communities by providing accessible, comprehensive quality health care to everyone with compassion and respect, regardless of ability to pay.
To provide health care services to underserved communities.
Community health center of snohomish county (chc) provides our diverse communities with access to high quality, affordable primary health care.
Long Valley Health Center is a rural federally qualified health clinic offering primary health, including physical examinations, dental services, acupuncture, well baby checks and immunizations. Long Valley Health Center will work to…
Gardner Health Services (GHS) is dedicated to providing high quality, comprehensive medical and mental healthcare, including prevention and education, early intervention, treatment and advocacy services which are affordable, respectful,…
Our mission is to ensure health care access to quality comprehensive health care services for persons who are medically needy or medically under-served and have traditionally experienced difficulty in getting care from traditional sources.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is East Valley Community Health Center Inc and the most unlike its peers is Sex Workers Outreach Project. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 47 years old; the field is 13. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 25% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
130 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 130 of the 158 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF THE PACIFIC SOUTHWEST ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD MAR MONTE INC ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD LOS ANGELES ↗
- Who funds Planned Parenthood Shasta-Diablo Inc ↗
- Who funds Planned Parenthood Pasadena and San Gabriel Valley Inc ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOODORANGE AND SAN BERNARDINO COUNTIES INC ↗
- Who funds FAMILY HEALTH CENTERS OF SAN DIEGO INC ↗
- Who funds HARBOR UCLA MEDICAL CENTER GUILD ↗
- Who funds ALTAMED HEALTH SERVICES CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds FAMILY HEALTHCARE NETWORK ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD CALIFORNIA CENTRAL COAST ↗
- Who funds NORTHEAST VALLEY HEALTH CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds COMPREHENSIVE COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS INC ↗
- Who funds ACCESS REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds MARIN COMMUNITY CLINIC ↗
- Who funds CENTRO DE SALUD DE LA COMUNIDAD DE SAN YSIDRO INC ↗
- Who funds VISTA COMMUNITY CLINIC ↗
- Who funds WILMINGTON COMMUNITY CLINIC ↗
- Who funds SANTA ROSA COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS ↗
- Who funds Altura Centers for Health ↗
- Who funds PEDIATRIC AND FAMILY MEDICAL CENTER DBA EISNER HEALTH ↗
- Who funds VIA CARE COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER ↗
- Who funds NEIGHBORHOOD HEALTHCARE ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS INC ↗
- Who funds WESTSIDE FAMILY HEALTH CENTER ↗
- Who funds LA MAESTRA FAMILY CLINIC INC ↗
- Who funds ST JOHN'S COMMUNITY HEALTH ↗
- Who funds LA CLINICA DE LA RAZA INC ↗
- Who funds CHICO FEMINIST WOMENS HEALTH CENTER dba WOMENS HEALTH SPECIALISTS ↗
- Who funds VENICE FAMILY CLINIC ↗
- Who funds VALLEY COMMUNITY HEALTHCARE ↗
- Who funds ASIAN PACIFIC HEALTH CARE VENTURE INC ↗
- Who funds EAST VALLEY COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Community Action Partnership of San Luis Obispo County Inc ↗
- Who funds Fresno County Economic Opportunities Commission ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: California Physicians' Service Fdn Dba Blue Shield of California Fdn · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Direct Relief · California Healthcare Foundation · California Primary Care Association · Public Health Institute · Delta Dental Community Care Foundation · The California Wellness Foundation · The California Endowment · East Bay Community Foundation · California Community Foundation · The Ralph M Parsons Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Essential Access Health funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.