· Public charity
Ibis Reproductive Health Inc
Ibis reproductive health drives change through bold, rigorous research and principled partnerships that advance sexual and reproductive autonomy, choices and health worldwide.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 8 grants below total $883,119 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $1,210,006 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $326,887 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 · FY2024
- Under $10k1 grant · $6k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $37k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $533k
- $250k+1 grant · $307k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| STANFORD UNIVERSITY | $307,022 |
| ADVOCATES FOR YOUTH | $209,000 |
| EUKI INC | $200,720 |
| UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO | $123,100 |
| IPAS | $16,594 |
| NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY | $10,435 |
| ABORTION CARE NETWORK | $10,000 |
| MOUNT HOLYOKE COLLEGE | $6,248 |
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 (FY17–20, $241k) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% 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.
Which US states your grants reach
Grants abroad, by region — $291k on the FY2024 return
Schedule F, as filed: 4 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: RESEARCH PROJECT
Stated purpose: RESEARCH PROJECT
Stated purpose: RESEARCH PROJECT
Stated purpose: RESEARCH PROJECT
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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
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.
8 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 62% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $217k 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
- NANATIVE AMERICAN COMMUNITY BOARD3× · 2017–2020 · $168k · revenue +6%
- ACABORTION CARE NETWORK4× · 2021–2024 · $127k · revenue +116%
- SISISTERSONG INC2× · 2018–2020 · $73k · revenue +525%
Funded once
- AAll-Optionsgraduated2× · 2021–2022 · $101k · revenue +110%
- TJTHE JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITALgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $69k · revenue +58%
- KHKentucky Health Justice Network Incgraduated2× · 2021–2022 · $55k · revenue +36%
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 institute is a leading research and policy organization committed to advancing sexual and reproductive health and rights in the united states and globally.
Women's law project creates a more just and equitable society by advancing the rights and status of all women throughout their lives. to this end, we engage in high-impact litigation, advocacy, and education. the core values of women's law…
We generate ideas, produce evidence, and design solutions to improve the lives of underserved populations around the world. we take a multidisciplinary, intergenerational, life-cycle approach that contributes to (see schedule o)four global…
Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.
Power to decide envisions a world where everyone - no matter who they are or where they live - has control over their bodies and can decide if, when, and under what circumstances to get pregnant and have a child. its mission is to advance…
National institute for reproductive health, inc. works to protect and advance equitable access to reproductive health care by building power at the state and local level. using an approach that is rooted in partnerships with state and…
Gynuity health projects works to develop and advocate for the use of scientific, clinical and programmatic evidence in reproductive and maternal health, assuring that each individual benefits from the fruits of medical science and…
The national institute for reproductive health action fund conducts non-partisan issue advocacy and electoral engagement to advance reproductive health, rights, and justice in states and cities across the country. nirh action fund builds…
The mission of Magee-Womens Research Institute and Foundation is to advance scientific knowledge in the fields of reproductive biology and women's health; translate this knowledge into improved health for women and infants; train current…
Planned Parenthood of Montana empowers all people to make informed decisions and ensures the freedom to manage their own sexuality, and personal health by providing the highest quality confidential healthcare services, education, and…
Gender IDEAL launched the Reproductive & Maternal Health Compass. RMH Compass works to support and protect reproductive and maternal health (RMH) benefits for all workers in the U.S. by engaging with employers to assess and expand their…
The organization eagerly partners with individuals, organizations, and countries that promote the highest attainable health and well-being for women through every stage of their lives. the organization is committed to building coalitions…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Abortion Care Network and the most unlike its peers is Cambridge Reproductive Health Consultants. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 35 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 8% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
28 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. 28 of the 34 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 ADVOCATES FOR YOUTH ↗
- Who funds THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds Euki Inc ↗
- Who funds NATIVE AMERICAN COMMUNITY BOARD ↗
- Who funds ABORTION CARE NETWORK ↗
- Who funds All-Options ↗
- Who funds NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
- Who funds SISTERSONG INC ↗
- Who funds THE JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL ↗
- Who funds IPAS ↗
- Who funds Kentucky Health Justice Network Inc ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO ABORTION FUND ↗
- Who funds University of Chicago ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL WOMEN'S LAW CENTER ↗
- Who funds NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland Fund Inc ↗
- Who funds CAMBRIDGE REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CONSULTANTS ↗
- Who funds Emory University ↗
- Who funds NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds ACOG FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ESSENTIAL ACCESS HEALTH ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF MOUNT HOLYOKE COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds WHOLE WOMAN'S HEALTH ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds SPARK REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE NOW ↗
- Who funds BLACK WOMEN FOR WELLNESS ↗
- Who funds THE HOWARD UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN WOMEN'S FORUM ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER TEXAS INC ↗
- Who funds ILLINOIS CAUCUS FOR ADOLESCENT HEALTH 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: Hopewell Fund · The Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · The Prentice Foundation Inc · New Venture Fund · The Irving Harris Foundation · The Ford Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · National Institute for Reproductive Health Inc · Ms Foundation for Women Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The William & Flora Hewlett 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 Ibis Reproductive Health 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.
- Northeastern University — 7% of income from government
- The Trustees of Mount Holyoke College — 1% of income from government
- The Johns Hopkins Hospital — 0% of income from government
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 Ibis Reproductive Health Inc?
Find your warmest path to Ibis Reproductive Health 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.