How much did NATIONAL HARM REDUCTION COALITION grant in FY2024?

NATIONAL HARM REDUCTION COALITION reported 7 grants totaling $187,256 in its FY2024 IRS filing.

Where is NATIONAL HARM REDUCTION COALITION based?

NATIONAL HARM REDUCTION COALITION is based in NY.

NATIONAL HARM REDUCTION COALITION

Foundation Dossiers Mostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →

· Public charity

NATIONAL HARM REDUCTION COALITION

The mission of the NATIONAL HARM REDUCTION COALITION (nhrc) is to provide national education on prevention and intervention to reduce drug related harm.

$187k

Granted FY2024

Grants

Communities

$7k

Largest

01What you fund

0172% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2018–2024.

Health$7.3MHuman Services$2.0MCivil Rights$898kEducation$738kReligion$430kPhilanthropy$345kPublic Benefit$323kYouth Development$286kCommunity Improvement$34kOther$4.9M

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2018

—

2019

nortonnorthbettervulnerablehealth deptonlinecollective

2020

louisvilleoutpatient treatmentonlinedisordershydedrugsnorth

2021

sexualcollectivevulnerablewomenbetteroutpatient treatmentdisorders

2022

facereferralssanmedicalsonomainformationhealth well-being

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$7,000

Median grant

States reached

$6.3M

Total assets

Largest grants

WECARE TN$7,000
SISTERREACH$7,000
TENNESSEE RECOVERY ALLIANCE$7,000
INDIANA RECOVERY ALLIANCE$7,000
COMMUNITY SHARES INC (NEXT STEP INITIATIVES)$7,000
METRO LOUISVILLE HARM REDUCTION TASK FORCE$7,000
POSITIVELY LIVING INC$7,000

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY18–24, $2.0M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12% — the area typically sits at 10%. 74% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$15M · 62 repeat orgs$1.8M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +144% since the first grant, against +67% for the ones you funded once.

62 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2024, 55 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$15M

$1.8M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+144%

+67%

Still filing today

77%

56%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

HealthHuman ServicesEducationCivil RightsReligionPhilanthropyOther

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

TRYSTEREO (FISCALLY SPONSORED NASEN)
3× · 2019–2021 · $946k · revenue +209%
HR
HARM REDUCTION SERVICES INC
3× · 2020–2022 · $489k · revenue +130%
HE
HIV EDUCATION AND PREVENTION PROJECT OF ALAMEDA COUNTY
3× · 2020–2022 · $474k · revenue +354%

Funded once

TC
TWIN CITY HARM REDUCTION COLLECTIVE (FISCALLY SPONSORED GREEN STREET UMC)
one grant, 2019 · $269k
N
NASEN
one grant, 2022 · $155k
SF
SAN FRANCISCO DRUG USERS UNIONgraduated
one grant, 2020 · $150k · revenue +67% · 51% of their budget

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

Harm Reduction Therapy Center

Harm Reduction Therapy Center is dedicated to providing treatment to low- and no-income people with co-occurring substance misuse and mental illness, and training mental health, drug treatment, and social service providers who work with…

Health

Southside Harm Reduction Services

To promote the health and rights of people who use drugs.

Health

Salt Lake Harm Reduction Project

Empowering the health and dignity of people who use drugs through advocacy, support, and community engagement.

Health

Northern Valley Harm Reduction Coalition

Northern Valley Harm Reduction Coalition (NVHRC) began as a community led effort committed to reducing harm and providing evidence-based education, advocacy, and direct services to all community members within Butte Couty, CA and the…

Education

Florida Harm Reduction

Consulting and technical assistance and provided street outreach with food, hygiene and referrals for health care and drug treatment services. also and aids organization, providing education and technical assistance in prevention, testing…

Human Services

Aids Community Resources Inc

Aids community resources, inc. d/b/a acr health, is a community-based organization providing prevention, education, and support services to people with chronic illnesses, including hiv/aids, and those at risk for contracting hiv, stds, and…

Education

Prevention Point Pittsburgh

To provide health empowerment services to injection drug users and prevent the spread of HIV.

Health

Faith in Harm Reduction Inc

Faith in Harm Reduction co-creates a justice movement which connects people who use drugs, people who do sex work, and communities of faith through the development of harm reduction centered spiritual resources, ritual support, and…

Human Services

Prevention Point Philadelphia Inc

To promote health, empowerment and safety for communities affected by drug use and poverty.

—

Northern Nevada Hiv Outpatient Program

We provide affordable, high-quality medical, behavioral health & support services for all.

Health

Arkansas Harm Reduction Project

Central Arkansas Harm Reduction Project is a grassroots organization based in Little Rock, Arkansas created by and for people impacted by the War on Drugs. We stand side-by-side with people in our community and offer love and support.

Health

Humanistic Alternatives to Addiction

Haart provides medical and counseling services for the treatment of opiate/opioid dependence.

Health

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is North Carolina Harm Reduction Coalition and the most unlike its peers is Points of Distribution. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 25 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) — 7% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

4%3/81

the rest of the field

11%

206,161/1,819,484

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.

05the grantee network

65 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

62/65

Grantees still filing

58/65

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Health$7,291,480Other$5,505,213Human Services$2,009,053Civil Rights$898,301Education$738,465Religion$430,102Philanthropy$345,013

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.

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.

AIDS UnitedDC50.4× affinity22 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: AIDS United · National Alliance of State And · Direct Relief · Broadway Caresequity Fights AIDS Inc · Elton John AIDS Foundation Inc · Emory University · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Public Health Institute · The Chicago Community Trust · Vital Strategies Inc · Solidago Foundation · Foundation to Promote Open Society

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 organisation NATIONAL HARM REDUCTION COALITION 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

1get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: SIERRA HARM REDUCTION COALITION.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~8 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 4 filed years.

Track record & reputation

medium risk

4 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up +95% since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 842839520 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on SIERRA HARM REDUCTION COALITION, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 8 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 73% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to National Harm Reduction Coalition?

Find your warmest path to National Harm Reduction Coalition through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

NATIONAL HARM REDUCTION COALITION

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

65 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to National Harm Reduction Coalition?

More from the funding graph

NATIONAL HARM REDUCTION COALITION

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

65 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to National Harm Reduction Coalition?

More from the funding graph