· Public charity
Fletcher Group Inc
To research and promote effective practices and public policy to improve health and wellbeing with a focus on addictive and lifestyle diseases, including substance use disorders and other chronic lifestyle diseases.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2021.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 14 grants below total $979,460 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $1,105,878 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $126,418 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 · FY2021
- Under $10k3 grants · $22k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $145k
- $50k–250k4 grants · $503k
- $250k+1 grant · $310k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY RESEARCH FOUNDATION | $309,616 |
| GET HELP INC | $208,297 |
| AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER FELD LLP | $130,000 |
| NATIONAL OPINION RESEARCH CENTER | $95,000 |
| RXASSURANCE CORPORATION | $69,718 |
| NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR RECOVERY RESIDENCES | $48,500 |
| SMART RECOVERY USA INC | $30,500 |
| ASTHO | $19,513 |
| FUTURE PLANS GETWORKERFIT | $18,700 |
| WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY | $16,004 |
| SMARTSHEET INC | $11,795 |
| NETWORK ONE INC | $8,000 |
| NASADAD | $7,500 |
| NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTY AND CITY HEALTH OFFICIALS (NACCHO) | $6,317 |
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 (FY21–21, $31k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
4 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2021, 0 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (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 FY2021, 39% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $596k 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
- UOUniversity of Kentucky Research Foundation2× · 2020–2021 · $659k · revenue +43%
- NANATIONAL ALLIANCE OF RECOVERY RESIDENCE2× · 2020–2021 · $78k · revenue +34%
- NANATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTY AND CITY HEALTH OFFICALS2× · 2020–2021 · $13k · revenue +141%
Funded once
- UOUNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY RESEARCH FOUNDATIONone grant, 2019 · $59k
- HMHOPA MOUNTAIN INCone grant, 2020 · $39k · revenue -50%
- HMHOPA MOUNTAINone grant, 2019 · $39k
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.
Founded in 1889, the national association of regulatory utility commisioners (naruc) is a non-profit organization dedicated to representing the state public service commisions who regulate the utilities that provide essential services such…
The association represents and advocates for home health agencies, hospices, and home care providers across the united states. it advances high quality, accessible home based care through federal and regulatory advocacy, professional…
Empowering college admission counseling professionals through education, advocacy, and community.
The american college health association (acha) serves as the principal leadership organization for advancing the health of college students and campus communities through advocacy, education, and research.
Nacwa is the national voice of public clean water utilities, shaping water policy, convening a vibrant peer network, and empowering water leaders.
To advance the practice of higher education attorneys for the benefit of the institutions they serve.
We empower directors and transform boards to be future ready.
To accelerate the nation's progress towards safe, efficient, high - quality health care and the improved health status of the american population.
American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…
Our mission: to improve the quality of health care.our vision: better health care. better choices. better health.
To establish standards that promote quality education in nurse anesthesia programs through accreditation.
To provide optimal, equitable health and well-being for all.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Smart Recovery Usa Inc and the most unlike its peers is National Alliance of Recovery Residence. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
10 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. 10 of the 27 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 University of Kentucky Research Foundation ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL OPINION RESEARCH CENTER ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL ALLIANCE OF RECOVERY RESIDENCE ↗
- Who funds HOPA MOUNTAIN INC ↗
- Who funds SMART RECOVERY USA INC ↗
- Who funds FEDERATION OF APPALACHIAN HOUSING ENTERPRISES INC ↗
- Who funds ASSOCIATION OF STATE AND TERRITORIAL HEALTH OFFICIALS ↗
- Who funds LAKE CUMBERLAND REGIONAL MH-MR BOARD INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTY AND CITY HEALTH OFFICALS ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE ALCOHOL AND DRUG AGENCY DIRECTORS 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.
Open a dossier: Amazonsmile 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 Fletcher Group 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 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Fletcher Group Inc?
Find your warmest path to Fletcher 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.