How much does Foundation for Opioid Response Efforts give?

Foundation for Opioid Response Efforts reported 104 grants totaling $9,367,874 in its FY2025 IRS filing. It funded between 19 and 64 organizations a year over FY2020 to FY2024.

What does Foundation for Opioid Response Efforts fund?

By grant dollars over FY2020 to FY2025, its largest causes are Health (53%), Education (21%), Crime & Legal (7%).

Who are Foundation for Opioid Response Efforts's largest grantees?

By total granted over FY2020 to FY2025: Center for Health Policy Development ($1.4M), Morgan County Partnership Inc ($1.4M), University of New Mexico ($1.4M).

Does Foundation for Opioid Response Efforts fund new organizations?

In FY2024, 17% of the organizations it funded were first-time grantees.

Does Foundation for Opioid Response Efforts accept unsolicited applications?

Its most recent filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and does not take unsolicited requests. Check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

Which funders back the same organizations as Foundation for Opioid Response Efforts?

Its strongest co-funders, measured against what their size predicts, include Cencora Impact Foundation, Laura and John Arnold Foundation, California Healthcare Foundation.

Where is Foundation for Opioid Response Efforts based?

Foundation for Opioid Response Efforts is based in NY.

Foundation for Opioid Response Efforts

Foundation for Opioid Response Efforts at a glance

· Private foundation

Foundation for Opioid Response Efforts

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$9.4M

Granted FY2025still arriving

104

Grants FY2025still arriving

States reached

$396k

Largest

01What it funds

01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Health$21MEducation$8.3MCrime & Legal$2.7MSocial Science$1.6MYouth Development$1.4MHousing & Shelter$1.2MScience & Tech$1.1MArts & Culture$757kOther$0

02FY2025 · 104 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

$10k–50k45 grants · $1.5M
$50k–250k58 grants · $7.5M
$250k+1 grant · $396k

$60,000

Median grant

States reached

$93M

Total assets

Largest grants
Recipient	Amount
EQUAL JUSTICE WORKS	$396,496
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON OFFICE OF SPONSORED PROGRAMS	$225,000
UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER	$225,000
UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER	$225,000
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON OFFICE OF SPONSORED PROGRAMS	$225,000
UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER	$225,000
MORGAN COUNTY PARTNERSHIP INC	$225,000
MORGAN COUNTY PARTNERSHIP INC	$225,000
THE DENVER HEALTH AND HOSPITALS FOUNDATION	$223,410
THE DENVER HEALTH AND HOSPITALS FOUNDATION	$223,410
NATIONAL INDIAN YOUTH LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT PROJECT INC	$221,430
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO	$198,000
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO	$198,000
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA	$197,130
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA	$197,130

02The need

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 (FY21–25, $556k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 58% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

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

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.

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.

$37M · 92 repeat orgs$1.9M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +18% since the first grant, against +13% for those funded once.

92 repeat relationships: 51 still active in FY2025, 41 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$37M

$542k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+18%

+13%

Still filing today

66%

30%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.4M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

HealthEducationHuman ServicesCrime & LegalPublic BenefitCommunity ImprovementOther

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

CF
CENTER FOR HEALTH POLICY DEVELOPMENT
6× · 2020–2025 · $1.4M · revenue +55%
MC
MORGAN COUNTY PARTNERSHIP INC
4× · 2022–2025 · $1.4M · revenue +37%
EM
EMERGENCY MEDICINE FOUNDATION
6× · 2020–2025 · $1.3M · revenue +8%

Funded once

NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCESgraduated
one grant, 2022 · $135k · revenue +29%
MS
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
one grant, 2020 · $125k
RO
REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
one grant, 2021 · $56k

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.

University of Maryland Anesthesiology Associates Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

—

University Family Physicians Inc

Engage actively and continuously in medical research, education and training in the practice of medicine in conjunction with the department of family medicine of the indiana university school of medicine and indiana university…

—

University Health Inc

Primary functions are the coordination and delivery of health care resources and services, health care education for the hospital service area, long range analysis of health care needs and development of programs, and arranging for…

—

University of Maryland Physicians Pa

—

University of Maryland Pediatric Associates Pa

Health

University of Maryland Family Medicine Associates Pa

—

University Associates in Obstetrics and Gynecology University Faculty Pract ice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health

University of Maryland Neurosurgeryassociates Pa

Education

University of Maryland Oncology Associates Pa

Health

University of Maryland Facultyphysicians Inc

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland, school of medicine, administrative support services are provided to the physician practices of the university of maryland, including but not limited to information technology,…

Health

University of Maryland Neurology Associates Pa

—

University of Maryland Eye Associates Pa

Health

How this is measured

The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Voices of Community Activists & Leaders (Vocal-Ny) Inc; the most unlike its peers is My Fathers House Nashville. 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

76 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 76 of the 119 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.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

75/76

Grantees still filing

53/76

Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Other$20,122,732Health$7,414,614Education$4,462,980Crime & Legal$3,466,467Public Benefit$1,548,297Youth Development$1,328,580Community Improvement$1,234,570

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

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.

Cencora Impact FoundationPA13.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Cencora Impact Foundation · Laura and John Arnold Foundation · California Healthcare Foundation · American Cancer Society Inc · Conrad N Hilton Foundation · The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation · Direct Relief · The Chicago Community Trust · The Ayco Charitable Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust

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 Foundation for Opioid Response Efforts funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Foundation for Opioid Response Efforts. Bigger dots raise more.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24’25

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

2get no government money at all

13report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)

1rely 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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Foundation for Opioid Response Efforts?

Find your warmest path to Foundation for Opioid Response Efforts 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.

Play a game based on Foundation for Opioid Response Efforts’ 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