· Public charity
National Health Law Program Inc
See schedule o.the national health law program protects and advances the health care rights and related civil rights of low-income individuals, families, and underserved communities.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k1 grant · $6k
- $10k–50k18 grants · $499k
- $50k–250k9 grants · $664k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| TENNESSEE JUSTICE CENTER | $143,000 |
| SOUTH CAROLINA APPLESEED LEGAL JUSTICE CENTER | $73,000 |
| LEGAL AID OF ARKANSAS | $73,000 |
| LEGAL COUNCIL FOR HEALTH JUSTICE (LCHJ) | $73,000 |
| LEGAL AID OF NORTH CAROLINA | $63,000 |
| LEGAL SERVICES OF EASTERN MISSOURI (LSEM) | $63,000 |
| ATLANTA LEGAL AID SOCIETY | $63,000 |
| FLORIDA HEALTH JUSTICE PROJECT (FHJP) | $63,000 |
| WILLIAM E MORRIS INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE | $50,000 |
| MISSISSIPPI CENTER FOR JUSTICE | $48,500 |
| COLORADO CENTER OF LAW & POLICY (CCLP) | $45,000 |
| INDIANA JUSTICE PROJECT (IJP) | $45,000 |
| COMMUNITY LEGAL AID SOCIETY INC (CLASI) | $45,000 |
| DISABILITY RIGHTS CONNECTICUT (DRC) | $45,000 |
| GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY | $40,000 |
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 human-services grants (FY19–24, $640k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 18% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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
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.
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 +39% since the first grant, against +25% for the ones you funded once.
31 repeat relationships — 18 still active in FY2024, 13 since wound down; 10 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, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $191k 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
- TJTENNESSEE JUSTICE CENTER INC6× · 2019–2024 · $651k · revenue +126%
- LALEGAL AID OF ARKANSAS5× · 2020–2024 · $539k · revenue +41%
NORTH CAROLINA JUSTICE CENTER3× · 2019–2021 · $527k · revenue +47%
Funded once
- SCSHRIVER CENTER ON POVERTY LAWone grant, 2019 · $55k · revenue -23%
- OLOREGON LAW CENTERone grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue +10%
- BOBOARD OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMAone grant, 2023 · $45k
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 legal aid justice center partners with communities and clients to achieve justice by dismantling systems that create and perpetuate poverty.
Work with DC courts, private bar & legal services providers to increase legal representations for low & moderate income DC residents, enhance efficiency of legal services, and reduce barriers to the judicial system.
Legal aid's mission is to 'make justice real' - in individual and systemic ways - for persons living in poverty in the district of columbia. in particular, legal aid provides civil legal assistance to individuals, families, and communities…
As one of the most enduring civil rights institutions on the West Coast, we work to dismantle systems of oppression and racism, and build an equitable and just society.
South carolina legal services is a statewide law firm that provides civil legal services to protect the rights and represent the interests of low income south carolinians.
The primary purpose of legal aid services of oregon shall be to achieve justice for the low-income communities of oregon by providing a full range of the highest quality civil legal services.
CIVIL LIBERTIES DEFENSE CENTER (CLDC) educates the general public about their rights and privileges under the US Constitution and provides free legal support to climate and social justice activists.
To protect, through litigation and legal representation, the civil rights of persons who have historically been subject to discrimination and poverty. the committee provides pro bono services by mobilizing the resources of volunteer…
Legal aid of east tennessee provides legal representation, legal education, and other civil legal services for the low-income population in our community through advocacy of all types.
Texas Legal Services Center is a nonprofit legal aid organization whose mission is to serve the undeserved by making civil justice accessible to every Texan--no matter their ability to earn. We're a coalition of attorneys, paralegals, pro…
Enforcing and protecting the rights of individuals and families by providing accessible, creative, and high quality legal assistance and working collaboratively for systemic change.
The Equal Justice Center is a non-profit law firm and employment justice organization which empowers low-income families, workers, and communities to achieve fair treatment in the workplace, in the justice system, and in our shared society…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New Mexico Center On Law and Poverty and the most unlike its peers is New York University. 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 45 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 — 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.
57 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. 57 of the 61 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 SOUTH CAROLINA APPLESEED LEGAL JUSTICE CENTER ↗
- Who funds TENNESSEE JUSTICE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds LEGAL AID OF ARKANSAS ↗
- Who funds NORTH CAROLINA JUSTICE CENTER ↗
- Who funds FLORIDA HEALTH JUSTICE PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds LEGAL SERVICES OF EASTERN MISSOURI INC ↗
- Who funds Legal Council for Health Justice ↗
- Who funds DISABILITY RIGHTS NORTH CAROLINA ↗
- Who funds Charlotte Center for Legal Advocacy Inc ↗
- Who funds GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds THE LEGAL AID SOCIETY OF COLUMBUS ↗
- Who funds WILLIAM E MORRIS INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds Genesee County Legal Aid Society DBA Center for Civil Justice ↗
- Who funds MISSISSIPPI CENTER FOR JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA APPLESEED CENTER FOR LAW IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST ↗
- Who funds DISABILITY LAW CENTER ↗
- Who funds Center on Budget and Policy Priorities ↗
- Who funds INDIANA JUSTICE PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds VIRGINIA POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds LEGAL AID OF NORTH CAROLINA INC ↗
- Who funds ATLANTA LEGAL AID SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds NEW HAMPSHIRE LEGAL ASSISTANCE INC ↗
- Who funds MOUNTAIN STATE JUSTICE INC ↗
- Who funds THE ARC OF THE UNITED STATES ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY LEGAL AID SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds DISABILITY RIGHTS CONNECTICUT INC ↗
- Who funds COLORADO CENTER ON LAW AND POLICY ↗
- Who funds Indiana Legal Services Inc ↗
- Who funds LEGAL AID SERVICES OF OKLAHOMA INC ↗
- Who funds SHRIVER CENTER ON POVERTY LAW ↗
- Who funds OREGON LAW CENTER ↗
- Who funds CIVIL RIGHTS EDUCATION AND ENFORCEMENT CENTER ↗
- Who funds NEW MEXICO CENTER ON LAW AND POVERTY ↗
- Who funds PONTIFICAL CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO ↗
- Who funds MOVEMENT ADVANCEMENT PROJECT ↗
- Who funds Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund Inc ↗
- Who funds JUSTICE IN AGING ↗
- Who funds Alaska Legal Services Corporation ↗
- Who funds IDAHO LEGAL AID SERVICES INC IDAHO LEGAL AID SERVICES 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: Equal Justice Works · Legal Services Corporation · MAZON A Jewish Response to Hunger · Hopewell Fund · Community Catalyst Inc · The Skadden Foundation · Shriver Center on Poverty Law · Center for Law and Social Policy · National Immigration Law Center · Georgetown University · National Legal Aid and Defender Association · The Impact Fund
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 National Health Law Program 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.
- Disability Rights Connecticut Inc — 78% of income from government
- Family Voices — 39% of income from government
- Community Legal Aid Society Inc — 38% of income from government
- Legal Aid Services of Oklahoma Inc — 13% of income from government
- Oregon Law Center — 11% 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 National Health Law Program Inc?
Find your warmest path to National Health Law Program 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.