· Public charity
Family Health International Inc
Fhi 360 is a global development organization delivering multi-disciplinary, evidence-based approaches to improve the health and socio-economic status of millions of people in disadvantaged communities throughout the world.
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.
The 146 grants below total $72,289,028 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $156,125,595 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $83,836,567 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k5 grants · $34k
- $10k–50k40 grants · $1.1M
- $50k–250k51 grants · $5.8M
- $250k+50 grants · $65M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| HELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL | $5,755,194 |
| CLINTON HEALTH ACCESS INITIATIVE | $4,981,658 |
| UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL | $4,551,836 |
| FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER CENTER | $3,919,654 |
| JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY | $3,620,182 |
| GOAL USA INC | $2,675,252 |
| POPULATION SERVICES INTERNATIONAL | $2,626,527 |
| THE TRUSTEES COLUMBIA | $2,374,190 |
| PALLADIUM INTERNATIONAL LLC | $2,010,862 |
| EMORY UNIVERSITY | $2,002,493 |
| YALE UNIVERSITY | $1,999,979 |
| RESEARCH TRIANGLE INSTITUTE HEALTH SOLUTIONS | $1,813,990 |
| UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH | $1,774,332 |
| TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA | $1,731,604 |
| THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF UCSF | $1,678,336 |
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 (FY17–25, $10.4M) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% 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 line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
Grants abroad, by region — $84M on the FY2025 return
Schedule F, as filed: 9 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: HIV/AIDS · GLOBAL HEALTH · SOCIO-ECONOMIC
Stated purpose: HIV/AIDS · GLOBAL HEALTH · SOCIO-ECONOMIC
Stated purpose: HIV/AIDS · GLOBAL HEALTH · SOCIO-ECONOMIC
Stated purpose: HIV/AIDS · GLOBAL HEALTH · SOCIO-ECONOMIC
Stated purpose: HIV/AIDS · GLOBAL HEALTH · SOCIO-ECONOMIC
Stated purpose: HIV/AIDS · GLOBAL HEALTH · SOCIO-ECONOMIC
Stated purpose: HIV/AIDS · GLOBAL HEALTH · SOCIO-ECONOMIC
Stated purpose: HIV/AIDS · GLOBAL HEALTH · SOCIO-ECONOMIC
Stated purpose: HIV/AIDS · GLOBAL HEALTH · SOCIO-ECONOMIC
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. 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.
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 +22% since the first grant, against +10% for the ones you funded once.
308 repeat relationships — 96 still active in FY2025, 212 since wound down; 40 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3.1M 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
- HKHELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL9× · 2017–2025 · $104M · revenue +44%
- ININTERNEWS NETWORK7× · 2017–2023 · $47M · revenue +109%
JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY9× · 2017–2025 · $33M · revenue +64%
Funded once
- HIHEALTHRIGHT INTERNATIONAL INCone grant, 2023 · $4.1M · revenue -40% · 28% of their budget
- UOUNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA HEALTH SERVICES FOUNDATION PCgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $677k · revenue +96%
- NGNAVANTI GROUP LLCone grant, 2019 · $640k
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 matches that aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
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.
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…
To discover, develop and deliver safe, effective and affordable vaccines for global public health. its vision is developing countries free of suffering from infectious disease.
Aahi is a nonprofit biotech research institute, bringing together the best experts, technologies, and platforms to create accessible, high-quality products and solutions for harnessing the immune system to alleviate disease.
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
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…
The institute is a leading research and policy organization committed to advancing sexual and reproductive health and rights in the united states and globally.
To improve the lives of people through innovative scientific and engineering research.
The university's goal in the coming decade is to advance learning through the integration of teaching, research and service to others. the core of this goal is to prepare graduates to engage with the world and lead lives of meaning. to do…
Usp's mission is to improve global health through public standards and related programs that help ensure the quality, safety, and benefit of medicines and foods.
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.": - count it: our work is…
Crisis group works to prevent and resolve deadly conflict around the world by informing and influencing the perceptions and actions of policymakers and other key conflict actors. to this end, we endeavour to talk to all sides and provide…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Family Health International Inc and the most unlike its peers is The Steinman Foundation. 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 38 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
234 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. 234 of the 461 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 HELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds INTERNEWS NETWORK ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds PACT INC ↗
- Who funds POPULATION SERVICES INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds THE HOWARD UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds Emory University ↗
- Who funds The George Washington University ↗
- Who funds CLINTON HEALTH ACCESS INITIATIVE INC ↗
- Who funds Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center ↗
- Who funds MAGEE-WOMENS RESEARCH INSTITUTE AND FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HDIInc ↗
- Who funds Yale University ↗
- Who funds JSI RESEARCH & TRAINING INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH ↗
- Who funds WORLD VISION INC ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds MANAGEMENT SCIENCES FOR HEALTH INC ↗
- Who funds GEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds THE ADMINISTRATORS OF THE TULANE EDUCATIONAL FUND ↗
- Who funds COOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL AIDS VACCINE INITIATIVE INC ↗
- Who funds THE HEKTOEN INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE ↗
- Who funds JHPIEGO CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds PUBLIC HEALTH FOUNDATION ENTERPRISES INC ↗
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: Gates Foundation · Jsi Research & Training Institute Inc · Johns Hopkins University · Path · Jhpiego Corporation · Global Communities · Population Services International · The Rockefeller Foundation · Clinton Health Access Initiative Inc · University of Pittsburgh · Cooperative for Assistance and Relief Everywhere Inc · Magee-Womens Research Institute and 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 Family Health International Inc 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Jsi Research & Training Institute Inc — 69% of income from government
- Management Sciences for Health Inc — 67% of income from government
- Jhpiego Corporation — 65% of income from government
- Mercy Corps — 47% of income from government
- World Learning Inc — 39% of income from government
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Fenway Community Health Center Inc — 27% of income from government
- Boston Medical Center Corporation — 23% of income from government
- Our Piece of the Pie Inc — 21% of income from government
- International Youth Foundation — 17% of income from government
- Trustees of Tufts College — 13% of income from government
- Johns Hopkins University — 12% of income from government
- Yale University — 12% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Inc — 6% of income from government
- University of Miami — 5% of income from government
- Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts Inc — 3% of income from government
- National Center On Institutions and Alternatives Inc — 0% of income from government
- Institute for Healthcare Improvement — 0% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 0% of income from government
- Association of Public Health Laboratories Inc — 0% of income from government
- Avenir Health Inc — 0% of income from government
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.
Play a game based on Family Health International’s filings →