Skip to content

· Private foundation

Kirk Humanitarian

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$1.5M
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$961k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Health$82MFood & Nutrition$2.9MInternational$2.3MReligion$2.1MPhilanthropy$1.4MHuman Services$1.0MPublic Benefit$700kEducation$210k
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $50k–250k2 grants · $200k
  • $250k+2 grants · $1.3M
$300,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$4.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
VITAMIN ANGEL ALLIANCE INC$960,885
MULTIFAITH ALLIANCE FOR SYRIAN$300,000
JOHN HOPKINS UNIVERSITY$100,000
MICRONUTRIENT FORUM$100,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY20–22, $350k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%AMERICAN INDIAN SERVICES: $150k → 8%AMERICAN INDIAN SERVICES: $100k → 8%AMERICAN INDIAN SERVICES: $100k → 8%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.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
NY
MA
OR
NV
NJ
CT
CA
UT
VA
MD
DC
GA
TX
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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$90M · 17 repeat orgs$2.4M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +87% since the first grant, against +26% for those funded once.

17 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 13 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
15

Total granted

$90M
$2.4M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+87%
+26%

Still filing today

47%
73%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
InternationalHealthEducationFood & NutritionHuman ServicesPhilanthropyOther
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

  • VA
    VITAMIN ANGEL ALLIANCE INC
    5× · 2019–2025 · $4.2M · revenue +87%
  • MF
    Micronutrient Forum
    6× · 2020–2025 · $2.1M · revenue +147%
  • MG
    MORE GOOD FOUNDATION
    4× · 2021–2024 · $847k · revenue +57%

Funded once

  • CO
    CORPORATION OF THE PRESIDENT
    one grant, 2019 · $700k
  • COOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $250k · revenue +34%
  • LM
    LAST MILE HEALTH
    one grant, 2019 · $250k · revenue -1%
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
MRIGlobal

To improve the lives of people through innovative scientific and engineering research.

Science & Tech
2
International Medical Corps

To save lives & relieve suffering through health interventions & related activities that strengthen communities affected by conflict, natural disasters & disease outbreaks.

International
3
Management Sciences for Health Inc

(msh) saves lives and improves the health of the world's poorest (see schedule o) and most vulnerable people by closing the gap between knowledge and action in public health.

International
4
Pathfinder International

Pathfinder expands access to sexual and reproductive health services, opening the door to opportunities for women and all individuals to thrive-economically, educationally, and civically. driven by our country-led leadership and local…

International
5
Clinton Health Access Initiative Inc

For over 20 years, chai's mission has been to save lives and improve health outcomes in low-and middle-income countries around the world. we do this by enabling the government and private sector to strengthen and sustain quality health…

International
6
Actionaid Usa

Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…

Social Science
7
International Aids Vaccine Initiative Inc

A nonprofit scientific research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.

International
8
Intrahealth International Inc

Our mission is to improve the performance of health workers and strengthen the systems in which they work.

Health
9
The One Campaign

The ONE Campaign ("ONE") continued its work to educate and raise awareness among the public, media and policymakers around the world about the importance of official development assistance and international programs that (Continued on…

Unclassified
10
Project Hope - the People-to-People Health Foundation Inc

To conduct and support programs and activities aimed at solving some of the world's greatest public health challenges, with a specific focus on enabling health workers to have the greatest possible impact on the health of the people they…

International
11
United States Pharmacopeial Convention

Usp's mission is to improve global health through public standards and related programs that help ensure the quality, safety, and benefit of medicines and foods.

Health
12
Intealth

See schedule oto serve the public by:- assuring the qualifications of health care professionals- providing primary-source verification of credentials of health careprofessionals, as they serve throughout the world- supporting international…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is World Vision Inc; the most unlike its peers is Eleanor Crook Foundation. 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

21 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. 21 of the 33 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/21
Grantees still filing
15/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CONTRACT PHARMACAL CORP: $77,881,850 · OtherCONTRACT PHARMACAL CORP+12 more: $4,592,033 · Other+12 moreVITAMIN ANGEL ALLIANCE INC: $4,225,885 · Food & NutritionMicronutrient Forum: $2,146,455 · EducationMORE GOOD FOUNDATION: $847,000 · Education+1 more: $90,000 · EducationDIRECT RELIEF: $292,500 · InternationalCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC: $250,000 · InternationalAMERICARES FOUNDATION INC: $250,000 · InternationalPROJECT CONCERN INTERNATIONAL: $250,000 · InternationalWORLD VISION INC: $200,000 · InternationalBread for the World Institute: $160,000 · InternationalMULTIFAITH ALLIANCE INC: $127,500 · InternationalUNITED NATIONS FOUNDATION INC: $120,000 · InternationalUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $103,576 · International+2 more: $35,000 · InternationalAmerican Indian Services: $350,000 · Human ServicesLAST MILE HEALTH: $250,000 · HealthHUNTSMAN CANCER FOUNDATION: $63,172 · HealthMARCH OF DIMES INC: $20,000 · HealthELEANOR CROOK FOUNDATION: $280,000 · Philanthropy
Other$82,473,883Food & Nutrition$4,225,885Education$3,083,455International$1,788,576Human Services$350,000Health$333,172Philanthropy$280,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetVITAMIN ANGEL ALLIANCE INC: $4,225,885 over 5y, 0.7% of budgetMicronutrient Forum: $2,146,455 over 6y, 24% of budgetMORE GOOD FOUNDATION: $847,000 over 4y, 15% of budgetAmerican Indian Services: $350,000 over 3y, 3.2% of budgetDIRECT RELIEF: $292,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetELEANOR CROOK FOUNDATION: $280,000 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC: $250,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLAST MILE HEALTH: $250,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetAMERICARES FOUNDATION INC: $250,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPROJECT CONCERN INTERNATIONAL: $250,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetWORLD VISION INC: $200,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBread for the World Institute: $160,000 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetUNITED NATIONS FOUNDATION INC: $120,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $103,576 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $90,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHUNTSMAN CANCER FOUNDATION: $63,172 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetI Am Zambia Inc: $25,000 over 1y, 21% of budgetAFRICARE: $25,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMARCH OF DIMES INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMAP International Inc: $10,000 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.

  • Who funds VITAMIN ANGEL ALLIANCE INC ↗
  • Who funds Micronutrient Forum ↗
  • Who funds MORE GOOD FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds American Indian Services ↗
  • Who funds DIRECT RELIEF ↗
  • Who funds ELEANOR CROOK FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds COOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC ↗
  • Who funds LAST MILE HEALTH ↗
  • Who funds AMERICARES FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT CONCERN INTERNATIONAL ↗
  • Who funds WORLD VISION INC ↗
  • Who funds Bread for the World Institute ↗
  • Who funds MULTIFAITH ALLIANCE INC ↗
  • Who funds UNITED NATIONS FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
  • Who funds JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds HUNTSMAN CANCER FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds I Am Zambia Inc ↗
  • Who funds AFRICARE ↗
  • Who funds MARCH OF DIMES INC ↗
  • Who funds MAP International Inc ↗

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.

Gates FoundationWA13.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Gates Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Kirk Humanitarian funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Kirk Humanitarian. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 12%
  • Johns Hopkins University: 12% of income from government
  • Americares Foundation Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
4report 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 Kirk Humanitarian?

Find your warmest path to Kirk Humanitarian 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 33 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-PF 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 Kirk Humanitarian’s filings →

More from the funding graph