Skip to content
Jefferson Hospital Association Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Jefferson Hospital Association Inc

Jefferson regional's mission is improving health through excellence and compassion with a vision to be the healthcare provider and employer of choice for southeast arkansas.

$581k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$55k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Public Benefit$450kPhilanthropy$322kHealth$71kRecreation & Sports$51kCommunity Improvement$11kEducation$7kArts & Culture$6kAnimals$6k
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $76,567, the rows itemized in this filing. The $581,319 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $504,752 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $21k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $55k
$11,275
Median grant
1
States reached
$252M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
United Way of Southeast Arkansas$55,292
Arkansas Hospital Association$11,275
Pine Bluff Convention Center$10,000
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 17%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 17%AR HOSPITAL EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST: $28k → 17%UNITED WAY OF SOUTH EAST ARKANSAS: $26k → 22%AR HOSPITAL EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST: $18k → 17%Pine Bluff Country Club: $9k → 22%Arkansas Hospital Association: $11k → 17%PINE BLUFF COUNTRY CLUB: $7k → 22%AR HOSPITAL EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST: $7k → 17%PINE BLUFF COUNTRY CLUB: $12k → 22%AR AFFILIATE OF SUSAN G KOMEN: $7k → 17%JEFFERSON CO TAX COLLECTOR: $10k → 22%AR GAME & FISH COMMISSION: $6k → 17%Pine Bluff Convention Center: $10k → 22%Arts & Science Center: $7k → 22%ARTS & SCIENCES CENTER: $6k → 22%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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$859k · 5 repeat orgs$65k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
6

Total granted

$859k
$44k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+15%
+86%

Still filing today

80%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 72% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $21k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Community ImprovementRecreation & SportsEducationAnimalsOther
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

  • GI
    GFPB Inc
    5× · 2018–2024 · $450k · revenue +439%
  • UW
    United Way of Southeast Ark Inc
    9× · 2017–2025 · $312k · revenue +15%
  • PB
    PINE BLUFF COUNTRY CLUB
    4× · 2017–2023 · $33k · revenue +195%

Funded once

  • JC
    JEFFERSON COUNTY
    one grant, 2019 · $10k
  • CO
    CITY OF WHITE HALL
    one grant, 2017 · $8k
  • SG
    SUSAN G KOMEN BREAST CANCER FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $7k
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
Arkansas Education Association

Advocate for educational professionals and unite our members and the state to fulfill the promise of public education to prepare every student to succeed in a diverse and interdependent world.

Education
2
Arkansas Health Care Association

Arkansas health care association was organized for the following purposes: (a) to maintain high standard of quality care and administration of nursing homes and similar health care facilities, (b) to create greater opportunities for the…

—
3
Arkansas Hospice Foundation Inc

Arkansas hospice foundation is a non-profit, charitable 501(c)(3) organization whose mission is to raise public awareness and financial support for arkansas hospice and related organization's programs and services, and to help donors meet…

Health
4
Arkansas Pharmacy Foundation

Promote profession of pharmacy in the state of arkansas.

Health
5
Little Rock Regional Chamber of Commerce

To foster economic growth and development in central arkansas.

—
6
Arkansas Construction Education Foundation

Provide educational programs for construction industries.

Education
7
Arkansas State Golf Association

Support and promotion of amature golf

—
8
Conway Area Chamber of Commerce

To promote local area businesses in the city of conway, arkansas who are members of the organization.

—
9
Arkansas Foundation for Medical Care Inc

To promote excellence in health care through evaluation and education

Health
10
Northwest Arkansas Council

Promotion of the growth, vitality, and development of northwest arkansas and its people, concentrating on workforce development, regional stewardship, infrastructure, and economic development.

—
11
Opportunity Arkansas Foundation

Renewing the land of opportunity by simplifying government and solving generational problems for the next generation.

Philanthropy
12
Arkansas Hospice Inc

To enhance the quality of life for those facing serious illness and loss by surrounding them with love and embracing them with the best in physical, emotional and spiritual care programs and services, and to help donors meet their…

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Arkansas Hospital Education and Research Trust Inc; the most unlike its peers is Pine Bluff Country Club. 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

8 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. 8 of the 13 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GFPB Inc: $450,000 · Community ImprovementGFPB IncUnited Way of Southeast Ark Inc: $312,101 · OtherUnited Way of Southeast Ark IncARKANSAS HOSPITAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH TRUST INC: $52,482 · OtherARKANSAS HOSPITAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH TRUST INC+7 more: $63,585 · Other+7 morePINE BLUFF COUNTRY CLUB: $33,069 · Recreation & SportsARTS & SCIENCES CENTER INC: $6,775 · EducationARKANSAS GAME AND FISH FOUNDATION: $6,000 · Animals
Community Improvement$450,000Other$428,168Recreation & Sports$33,069Education$6,775Animals$6,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetGFPB Inc: $450,000 over 5y, 9.7% of budgetUnited Way of Southeast Ark Inc: $312,101 over 9y, 3.1% of budgetARKANSAS HOSPITAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH TRUST INC: $52,482 over 3y, 4.2% of budgetPINE BLUFF COUNTRY CLUB: $33,069 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetTHE ECONOMIC DEV ALLIANCE OF JEFFERSON CO AR: $11,310 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetARKANSAS HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION INC: $11,275 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetARTS & SCIENCES CENTER INC: $6,775 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetARKANSAS GAME AND FISH FOUNDATION: $6,000 over 1y, 0.3% 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.

Trotter FoundationAmazonsmile Foundation
Trotter FoundationAR15.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Trotter 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 Jefferson Hospital Association Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Jefferson Hospital Association Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%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, FY20–25
    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 Jefferson Hospital Association Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Jefferson Hospital Association 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.

    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 13 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 Jefferson Hospital Association’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