· Public charity
Health Access Foundation
Advocate for quality, affordable health care for all californians through research, policy analysis, organizing, coalition-building, public education and advocacy.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 4 grants below total $268,900 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $315,150 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $46,250 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 $10k1 grant · $8k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $59k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $202k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| PASCHAL ROTH PUBLIC AFFAIRS | $202,150 |
| CALIFORNIA IMMIGRANT POLICY CENTER | $32,000 |
| CALIFORNIA PAN-ETHNIC HEALTH NETWORK | $27,250 |
| DISABILITY VOICES UNITED | $7,500 |
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 (FY20–23, $137k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 92% 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 +49% since the first grant, against +20% for the ones you funded once.
17 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2025, 16 since wound down; 3 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, 10% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $242k 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
- CVCAL VOICES6× · 2017–2022 · $766k · revenue +114%
California Pan-Ethnic Health Network6× · 2017–2025 · $347k · revenue +177%- ECEQUALITY CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE4× · 2018–2021 · $294k · revenue +164%
Funded once
- MMMETAMORPHOSIS MEDICAL CENTERone grant, 2023 · $45k
- QHQueer Humboldtgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $45k · revenue +233%
- SJSAN JOAQUIN PRIDE CENTER INCone grant, 2023 · $30k
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.
The Center works to create a region where all LGBTQ+ people thrive; we support health and wellness,advocate for equity and justice, and work to uplift our diverse and culturally rich LGBTQ+ community.
Provide counseling and case management services as a prevention and early intervention strategy to reduce stigma and isolation of lgbto clients.
Lgbtq social services
The purpose of the Rainbow Chamber of Commerce is to: Promote networking within the gay and lesbian business community and its supporters. Enhance the awareness of political and social issues. Encourage involvement in charitable causes.The…
The mission of the Merced LGBTQ+ Alliance is to advocate for the interests of the LGBTQ+ community within Merced County. We celebrate our diversity and advocate for justice and opportunities for members of our vulnerable community. We…
Provides culturally responsive therapy, peer to peer support groups, community outreach services, and facilitated workshops in Alameda County with the aim to enhance the mental health and overall well-being of the LGBTQIA+ and QTBIPOC…
The Spahr Center provides cultural, community, and health programs and direct services that celebrate and support Marin County, California's LGBTQ+ and HIV communities.
To provide education and support to the LGBTQ+ community.
Our mission is to provide advocacy, visibility, safety, and wellness for the lgbtq+ community. we achieve this through our community resource center, programs, and community building events.
Pomona Valley Pride advances the well-being of LGBTQIA2S+ individuals and allies through affirming support services, educational and arts programming, advocacy, collaborative partnerships, and community-centered initiatives that empower…
Our mission is to ameliorate disparities faced by transgender, gender non-binary and intersex people as well as help reduce similar disparities among our lesbian, gay and bisexual communities.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Source Lgbt Center Inc and the most unlike its peers is Consumer Reports Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 29 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) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 15% 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.
27 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. 27 of the 40 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 CAL VOICES ↗
- Who funds California Pan-Ethnic Health Network ↗
- Who funds EQUALITY CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds NORCAL OUTREACH PROJECT ↗
- Who funds STILL BISEXUAL ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY PARTNERS ↗
- Who funds Imperial Valley LGBT Resource Center Inc ↗
- Who funds Fresno County Economic Opportunities Commission ↗
- Who funds CONSUMER REPORTS INC ↗
- Who funds Western Center on Law & Poverty Inc ↗
- Who funds THE SOURCE LGBT CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds AMADOR COUNTY ARTS COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds Oakland LGBTQ Community Center Inc ↗
- Who funds Queer Humboldt ↗
- Who funds DIVINE TRUTH UNITY FELLOWSHIP CHURCH ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA IMMIGRANT POLICY CENTER ↗
- Who funds SAN JOAQUIN PRIDE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Rainbow Community Center of Contra Costa County ↗
- Who funds SOMOS FAMILIA VALLE ↗
- Who funds Gender Spectrum Charitable Fund ↗
- Who funds LOS ANGELES LGBT CENTER ↗
- Who funds Unique Womans Coalition ↗
- Who funds Disability Voices United ↗
- Who funds POSITIVE IMAGES ↗
- Who funds BAYMEC COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds North County LGBTQ Resource Center ↗
- Who funds SAN FRANCISCO STUDY CENTER 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: Equality California Institute · The California Endowment · The California Wellness Foundation · Sierra Health Foundation Center for Health Program Management · Horizons Foundation · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Weingart Foundation · Tides Foundation · Sierra Health Foundation · California Community Foundation · California Healthcare Foundation · Public Health Institute
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 Health Access Foundation 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.