· Private foundation
Medtronic Global Health Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2023.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| KARNATAKA HEALTH PROMOTION TRUST | $50,000 |
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 US giving — 90% of grant dollars ($11M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 10% that went abroad ($1.2M) is mapped below.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–22) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 43% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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
Beyond the US — 10% of all-years giving ($1.2M)
5 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 14% of Medtronic Global Health Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +53% since the first grant, against +6% for the ones you funded once.
11 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2023, 10 since wound down.
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 FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- RTResearch Triangle Institute2× · 2020–2021 · $1.8M · revenue +53%
- CHCHILDREN'S HEARTLINK3× · 2020–2022 · $720k · revenue +61%
- HCHealthFinders Collaborative Inc2× · 2020–2021 · $640k · revenue +89%
Funded once
- CFCENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL FOUNDATIONone grant, 2021 · $1.0M
AMERICARES FOUNDATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $800k · revenue +28%
UNITED NATIONS FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2020 · $500k · revenue -74%
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.
Health care services for the people of western nebraska and eastern wyoming.
To be the leading voice of medicine to make minnesota the healthiest state and the best place to practice.
To improve the lives of people through innovative scientific and engineering research.
Our mission is to lead the world in transforming lives to create a healthy future for all individuals and communities through premier educational programs, innovative research and extraordinary patient care.
Glencoe regional health services exists to improve every life by offering high-quality, safe, and accessible healthcare. we are dedicated to strengthening healthcare by connecting our communities, enhancing the patient experience,…
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…
UF Health's mission is to promote health through outstanding and high-quality patient care, innovative and rigorous education in the health professions and biomedical sciences, and high-impact research across the spectrum of basic,…
Neighborhealth's mission is to promote and sustain healthy communities, families, and individuals by providing accessible, person-centered, and compassionate, high-quality health care services to all who live and work in our service area,…
(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.
The mission of the national coalition on health care (nchc) is to support research and analysis, develop and promote policy solutions, build consensus, and engage the public in order to ensure that america has a high quality health system…
Our mission is to improve the performance of health workers and strengthen the systems in which they work.
To provide patient-centered, quality-driven, whole-person healthcare services, accessible to everyone in our community.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Lifenet International Corporation and the most unlike its peers is Wellshare International. 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 28 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) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% 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.
25 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. 25 of the 37 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 Research Triangle Institute ↗
- Who funds AMERICARES FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S HEARTLINK ↗
- Who funds HealthFinders Collaborative Inc ↗
- Who funds BRAC USA INC ↗
- Who funds GRAMEEN AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds MOTHERS2MOTHERS UNITED STATES INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
- Who funds UNITED NATIONS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds DIRECT RELIEF ↗
- Who funds CEDAR RIVERSIDE PEOPLE'S CENTER ↗
- Who funds LAST MILE HEALTH ↗
- Who funds Public Health Institute ↗
- Who funds Northern California Center For Well-Being ↗
- Who funds Lwala Community Alliance ↗
- Who funds LIFENET INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds WOMEN IN GLOBAL HEALTH INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NATIVE AMERICAN COMMUNITY CLINIC ↗
- Who funds OPEN CITIES HEALTH CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds RAINBOW HEALTH MINNESOTA ↗
- Who funds NORTHSIDE ACHIEVEMENT ZONE ↗
- Who funds NorthPoint Health and Wellness Center Inc ↗
- Who funds SEED GLOBAL HEALTH ↗
- Who funds WELLSHARE INTERNATIONAL ↗
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: The Minneapolis Foundation · Medtronic Communities Foundation · Saint Paul & Minnesota Foundation · Medica Foundation · Otto Bremer Trust · Delta Dental of Minnesota Foundation · Ucare Foundation · Allina Health System · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Ucare Minnesota · Conrad N Hilton Foundation · Greater Houston Community 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 Medtronic Global Health 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.
- Americares Foundation Inc — 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 Medtronic Global Health Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Medtronic Global Health Foundation 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.