Skip to content
Help Haiti Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Help Haiti Inc

Providing support for the people of Haiti in various projects to improve their lives

$122k
Granted FY2022
7
Grants FY2022
5
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2022.

International$198k
02FY2022 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2022

  • Under $10k1 grant · $4k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $69k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$11,779
Median grant
5
States reached
$200k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MIDWIVES FOR HAITI$50,000
HOPE FOR HAITIANS$24,000
ROAD TO HOPE FOR HAITI$12,000
FOUNDATION FOR ADVANCEMENT OF HAITIAN MIDWIVES$11,779
LOVING HAITI$11,000
CHARLES SCHWAB-ST LUKE FOUNDATION$10,000
ST LUKE FOUNDATION$3,500
02The need
03

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 (FY21–22) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 59% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%FOUNDATION FOR ADVANCEMENT OF HAITIAN MIDWIVES: $12k → 17%CHARLES SCHWAB-ST LUKE FOUNDATION: $10k → 15%BONZEB INC: $10k → 12%HAITI OUTREACH: $12k → 9%ROAD TO HOPE FOR HAITI: $32k → 12%CHARITIES AID FOUNDAITON: $7k → 9%MIDWIVES FOR HAITI: $50k → 22%ST LUKE FOUNDATION - HAITI: $6k → 15%ROAD TO HOPE FOR HAITI: $12k → 12%ST LUKE FOUNDATION: $4k → 15%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 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
Partner Haiti

To reduce childhood malnutrition in Haiti and provide people in rural areas access to life-saving medical care.

—
2
Help One Help All - Hoha Inc

helping the less fortunate in Haiti

International
3
Hope Ministries for Haiti Inc
—
4
Mortel High Hopes for Haiti Foundation
Philanthropy
5
Haiti Health Initiative

Serve the Timo Haiti community (education/health)

International
6
Flying High for Haiti Corp
—
7
Good Samaritan Foundation Inc
Education
8
Haiti Library Foundation Inc

Promoting Literacy in Haiti

International
9
New Hope for Haiti

To provide medical services

Human Services
10
Haiti Air Ambulance Service Inc
Public Safety & Disaster
11
Haiti Foundation of Hope

To address the physical, emotional, and spirtual needs of the people in the impoverished and underserved rural communities of northern haiti.

International
12
Foundation for Hope and Health in Haiti

Continued charitable health care to indigents of Haiti W.I. Promote preventitive care. Support education through high school.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Haiti Outreach Inc; the most unlike its peers is BonZeb Inc. 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

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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ROAD TO HOPE OF HAITI: $43,800 · InternationalROAD TO HOPE OF HAITIHOPE FOR HAITIANS INC: $24,000 · InternationalHOPE FOR HAITIANS INCTHE ST LUKE FOUNDATION FOR HAITI: $19,500 · InternationalTHE ST LUKE FOUNDATION FOR HAITIHAITI OUTREACH INC: $12,000 · InternationalHAITI OUTREACH INCMIDWIVES FOR HAITI INC: $50,000 · HealthMIDWIVES FOR HAITI INCFOUNDATION FOR ADVANCEMENT OF HAITIAN MIDWIVES INC: $11,779 · HealthFOUNDATION FOR ADVANCEMENT OF HAITI…Loving Haiti Inc: $11,000 · PhilanthropyLoving Hai…CHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA: $7,454 · PhilanthropyCHARITIES …BonZeb Inc: $10,000 · Community ImprovementAYITI NOW CORP: $8,000 · Other
International$99,300Health$61,779Philanthropy$18,454Community Improvement$10,000Other$8,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMIDWIVES FOR HAITI INC: $50,000 over 1y, 6.0% of budgetROAD TO HOPE OF HAITI: $43,800 over 2y, 14% of budgetHOPE FOR HAITIANS INC: $24,000 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetTHE ST LUKE FOUNDATION FOR HAITI: $19,500 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetHAITI OUTREACH INC: $12,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR ADVANCEMENT OF HAITIAN MIDWIVES INC: $11,779 over 1y, 11% of budgetLoving Haiti Inc: $11,000 over 1y, 6.0% of budgetBonZeb Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetCHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA: $7,454 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

Natl Christian Charit…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Natl Christian Charitable Fdn IncGA7.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Help Haiti Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Help Haiti Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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.

    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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $26k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2022, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Help Haiti’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