Skip to content
Fuhn Community Care Network at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Fuhn Community Care Network

The purpose of fuhn community care netowrk is to establish and operate a cooperative network of federally qualified health centers (fqhc) and other health care providers that will provide better quality care to patients through efficient and collaborative operations and innovative payment arrangements.

$1.5M
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$306k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $17k
  • $50k–250k8 grants · $1.2M
  • $250k+1 grant · $306k
$156,890
Median grant
1
States reached
$950k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AXIS MEDICAL CENTER$305,731
REGENTS OF THE U OF MN DBA COMMUNITY UNIVERSITY HEALTH CARE CENTER$237,191
UNITED FAMILY MEDICINE$169,804
NEIGHBORHOOD HEALTHSOURCE$157,153
CEDAR RIVERSIDE PEOPLE'S CENTER DBA PEOPLE'S CENTER CLINICS & SERVICES$156,890
SOUTH SIDE COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES INC$147,367
NATIVE AMERICAN COMMUNITY CLINIC$118,877
INDIAN HEALTH BOARD OF MINNEAPOLIS INC$95,213
OPEN CITIES HEALTH CENTER$72,685
OPEN DOOR HEALTH CENTER$17,457
02The need
02

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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY24–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%AXIS MEDICAL CENTER: $306k → 11%UNITED FAMILY MEDICINE: $170k → 14%OPEN DOOR HEALTH CENTER: $46k → 15%AXIS MEDICAL CENTER: $200k → 11%UNITED FAMILY MEDICINE: $155k → 14%OPEN DOOR HEALTH CENTER: $17k → 15%REGENTS OF THE U OF MN DBA COMMUNITY UNIVERSITY HEALTH CARE CENTER: $237k → 11%OPEN CITIES HEALTH CENTER: $89k → 14%REGENTS OF THE U OF MN DBA COMMUNITY UNIVERSITY HEALTH CARE CENTER: $195k → 11%OPEN CITIES HEALTH CENTER: $73k → 14%NATIVE AMERICAN COMMUNITY CLINIC: $127k → 11%NATIVE AMERICAN COMMUNITY CLINIC: $119k → 11%INDIAN HEALTH BOARD OF MINNEAPOLIS INC: $102k → 11%INDIAN HEALTH BOARD OF MINNEAPOLIS INC: $95k → 11%SOUTH SIDE COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES INC: $147k → 11%SOUTH SIDE COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES INC: $107k → 11%NEIGHBORHOOD HEALTHSOURCE: $157k → 11%NEIGHBORHOOD HEALTHSOURCE: $125k → 11%CEDAR RIVERSIDE PEOPLE'S CENTER DBA PEOPLE'S CENTER CLINICS & SERVICES: $157k → 11%CEDAR RIVERSIDE PEOPLE'S CENTER DBA PEOPLE'S CENTER CLINICS & SERVICES: $133k → 11%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.
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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.8M · 10 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 10 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
0

Total granted

$2.8M
$0

Still filing today

90%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’24’25
RenewedFirst-time
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

  • UM
    Universal Medical Services INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $505k · revenue 0%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
    2× · 2024–2025 · $432k
  • UF
    UNITED FAMILY PRACTICE HEALTH CENTER
    2× · 2024–2025 · $325k · revenue 0%

Funded once

    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
    Universal Community Health Center

    The organization provides quality and accessible health care to underserved communties and a pateint centered model of care to empower communities towards wellness.

    Health
    2
    Northwest Community Health Care

    The mission of the organization is to provide primary medical, dental, behavioral health, pharmacy and related support services to the residents of the Rhode Island communities that it serves regardless of ability to pay. The emphasis is…

    Health
    3
    Community Health Care Inc

    Community health care provides the communities we serve with excellence in patient-centered medical, dental, and behavioral health care that is compassionate, affordable, and accessible.

    —
    4
    Heartland Community Health Clinic D/B/a Heartland Health Services

    Provide affordable, high-quality health services and remove inequities to improve the lives of all.

    Health
    5
    Interior Community Health Center

    Our mission is to provide universal access to excellent primary health care for patients of all ages, stages of life, and backgrounds.

    Health
    6
    Northland Health Partners Community Health Center

    Northland community health center is committed to providing access to affordable and quality health services.

    Health
    7
    United Hospital District

    At United Hospital District, we exist to provide and promote appropriate health care services to the communities we serve, doing so in a safe and healing environment which supports our patient-centered care philosophy.

    Health
    8
    Peoples Community Health Clinic Inc

    Dedicated to providing access to affordable, compassionate, high quality health care for all.

    Health
    9
    Regional West Health Services

    Health care services for the people of western nebraska and eastern wyoming.

    Health
    10
    Marin Community Clinic

    To improve the health of our patients and community by providing high quality, cost-effective, culturally sensitive, patient-centered health care.

    Health
    11
    Coal Country Community Health Center

    Working together as partners to enhance the lives of area residents by providing a neighborhood of patient centered healthcare services that promote wellness, prevention and care coordination.

    Health
    12
    Capitol City Family Health Center Inc

    To provide quality, affordable health care to all.

    Health
    How this is measured
    The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is United Family Practice Health Center; the most unlike its peers is Universal Medical Services Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
    03the grantee network

    9 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. 9 of the 10 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.

    0
    Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
    0
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    9/9
    Grantees still filing
    1/9
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    Universal Medical Services INC: $505,306 · HealthUniversal Medical Services INCUNITED FAMILY PRACTICE HEALTH CENTER: $325,139 · HealthUNITED FAMILY PRACTICE HEALTH CENTERCEDAR RIVERSIDE PEOPLE'S CENTER: $289,674 · HealthCEDAR RIVERSIDE PEOPLE'S CENTERSOUTHSIDE COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES INC: $254,174 · HealthSOUTHSIDE COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES INCNATIVE AMERICAN COMMUNITY CLINIC: $245,675 · HealthNATIVE AMERICAN COMMUNITY CLINICINDIAN HEALTH BOARD OF MINNEAPOLIS INC: $197,532 · HealthINDIAN HEALTH BOARD OF MINNEAPOLIS INCOPEN CITIES HEALTH CENTER INC: $161,945 · HealthOPEN CITIES HEALTH CENTER INC+1 more: $62,980 · HealthUNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA: $432,070 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTANEIGHBORHOOD HEALTHSOURCE: $281,703 · OtherNEIGHBORHOOD HEALTHSOURCE
    Health$2,042,425Other$713,773

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

    25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUniversal Medical Services INC: $505,306 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetUNITED FAMILY PRACTICE HEALTH CENTER: $325,139 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetCEDAR RIVERSIDE PEOPLE'S CENTER: $289,674 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetNEIGHBORHOOD HEALTHSOURCE: $281,703 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetSOUTHSIDE COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES INC: $254,174 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetNATIVE AMERICAN COMMUNITY CLINIC: $245,675 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetINDIAN HEALTH BOARD OF MINNEAPOLIS INC: $197,532 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetOPEN CITIES HEALTH CENTER INC: $161,945 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetOPEN DOOR HEALTH CENTER: $62,980 over 2y, 0.4% 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.

    Neighborhood Health C…Minnesota Association…Ucare MinnesotaDelta Dental of Minne…American Heart Associ…Boston Scientific Fou…Allina Health SystemAmerican Cancer Socie…Otto Bremer TrustThe Minneapolis Found…Amazonsmile Foundation
    Neighborhood Health Care Network Inc Dba Federally Qualified Health Center UnMN20× affinity7 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: Neighborhood Health Care Network Inc Dba Federally Qualified Health Center Un · Minnesota Association of Community Health Centers · Ucare Minnesota · Delta Dental of Minnesota Foundation · American Heart Association Inc · Boston Scientific Foundation Inc · Allina Health System · American Cancer Society Inc · Otto Bremer Trust · The Minneapolis Foundation · 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 Fuhn Community Care Network funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Fuhn Community Care Network. Bigger dots raise more.

    2024
    ’20’21’22’23’24
    no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
      no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
      0get no government money at all
      1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
      0rely on government for over half their income
      typical government reliance, FY20–24
      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 10 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 Fuhn Community Care Network’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