Skip to content
National Indian Health Board at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

National Indian Health Board

Established by the tribes to advocate as the united voice of federally recognized american indian and alaska native tribes, nihb seeks to reinforce tribal sovereignty, strengthen tribal health systems, secure resources, and build capacity to achieve the highest level of health and well-being for our people.

$1.9M
Granted FY2024still arriving
30
Grants FY2024still arriving
16
States reached
$350k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2024.

Human Services$4.2MHealth$4.0MEducation$175kPublic Safety & Disaster$100kSocial Science$49kCommunity Improvement$15kReligion$15kEnvironment$9k
02FY2024 · 30 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 30 grants below total $1,827,465, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,930,746 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $103,281 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 · FY2024

  • Under $10k6 grants · $48k
  • $10k–50k14 grants · $365k
  • $50k–250k9 grants · $1.1M
  • $250k+1 grant · $350k
$30,000
Median grant
16
States reached
$8.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TULE RIVER HEALTH CENTER INC$350,000
HO-CHUNK NATION 1$176,500
GREAT PLAINS TRIBAL LEADER'S HEALTH BOARD$175,000
SALT RIVER PIMA-MARICOPA$166,000
TURTLE MOUNTAIN BAND CHIPPEWA INDIANS$150,000
TUNICA-BILOXI TRIBE OF LOUISIANA$116,500
SONOMA COUNTY INDIAN HEALTH PROJECT$95,000
PONCA TRIBE OF NEBRASKA-1 (DELETED)$75,000
SUQUAMISH INDIAN TRIBE (1)$60,000
DOT LAKE VILLAGE$50,000
NORTON SOUND HEALTH CORPORATION$45,000
TUBA CITY REGIONAL HEALTH CARE CORPORATION$38,000
UNITED INDIAN HEALTH SERVICES INC$37,250
MATHEMATICA INC$34,430
IOWA TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA$30,000
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 (FY19–20, $36k) land where the poverty rate runs at 21%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%NATIONAL COUNCIL OF URBAN INDIAN HEALTH: $15k → 14%MANIILAQ ASSOCIATION: $15k → 20%OGLALA SIOUX TRIBE HEALTH ADMINISTRATION: $6k → 42%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

AK
WA
ID
MT
ND
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
SD
PA
CT
CA
NE
MO
VA
MD
AZ
NM
KS
TN
NC
DC
OK
LA
MS
AL
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 100% of National Indian Health Board’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

National Indian Health Boardlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

75%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$6.4M · 54 repeat orgs$2.2M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +59% since the first grant, against +24% for those funded once.

54 repeat relationships: 21 still active in FY2024, 33 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

54
74

Total granted

$6.4M
$1.8M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+59%
+24%

Still filing today

28%
20%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 77% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $411k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementEducationSocial ScienceOther
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

  • AN
    ALASKA NATIVE TRIBAL HEALTH CONSORTIUM
    3× · 2020–2022 · $489k · revenue +88%
  • US
    UNITED SOUTH AND EASTERN TRIBESINC
    2× · 2017–2021 · $478k · revenue +11%
  • TR
    TULE RIVER INDIAN HEALTH CENTER INC
    2× · 2022–2024 · $365k · revenue +4%

Funded once

  • OL
    ORANSI LLC
    one grant, 2023 · $259k
  • AC
    ALEN CORPORATION
    one grant, 2023 · $177k
  • AI
    AMERICAN INDIAN CANCER FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $130k · revenue +37%
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
National Indian Health Board

Established by the tribes to advocate as the united voice of federally recognized american indian and alaska native tribes, nihb seeks to reinforce tribal sovereignty, strengthen tribal health systems, secure resources, and build capacity…

—
2
Indian Health Center of Santa Clara Valley

To help ensure the survival and healing of american indians and alaskan natives and the greater community by providing high quality, comprehensive health care and cultural services.

Health
3
Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board

The mission of the organization is to assist northwest tribes to improve the health status and quality of life of member tribes and indian people in their delivery of culturally appropriate and holistic health care.

Health
4
Seattle Indian Health Board

Seattle indian health board is a community health center that provides health and human services to its patients, while specializing in the care of native people. we are recognized as a leader in the promotion of health improvement for…

Health
5
American Indian Health & Services

To promote and provide quality services to improve the health and well-being of American Indians/Alaska Natives and other community members.

Arts & Culture
6
Tanana Chiefs Conference

Tanana Chiefs Conference provides a unified voice in advancing sovereign tribal governments through the promotion of physical and mental wellness, education, socioeconomic development, and culture of the interior Alaska native people.

Health
7
Texas Native Health

To strengthen and encourage the health and well-being of native americans.

Human Services
8
Sonoma County Indian Health Project Inc

To continually improve and maintain a comprehensive health care system to serve the needs and traditional values of our american indian community.

Health
9
Albuquerque Area Indian Health Board Inc

The albuquerque area indian health board,inc., advocates on behalf of american indians through the timely delivery of quality public health services to 27 tribes in new mexico, colorado, and texas that honor spiritual and cultural values.

—
10
Native Healing Llc
Animals
11
Healthy Alaska Natives Foundation

To work collaboratively toward a common vision that alaska natives are the healthiest people in the world, improve lives, and inspire good health.

Health
12
Toiyabe Indian Health Project

The mission of the toiyabe indian health project is to provide healthcare and promotion wellness to indian communities. toiyabe is a consortium of seven federally recognized tribes and to native american communities.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Tule River Indian Health Center Inc; the most unlike its peers is American Indian Cancer Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

34 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. 34 of the 137 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
31/34
Grantees still filing
29/34
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SALT RIVER PIMA-MARICOPA: $543,300 · OtherSALT RIVER PIMA-MARICOPAUNITED SOUTH AND EASTERN TRIBESINC: $477,800 · OtherUNITED SOUTH AND EASTERN TRIBESINCTURTLE MOUNTAIN BAND OF CHIPPEWA: $416,000 · OtherTURTLE MOUNTAIN BAND OF CHIPPEWAORANSI LLC: $258,588 · OtherSWINOMISH INDIAN TRIBAL COMMUNITY: $254,184 · OtherLUMMI NATION: $230,224 · OtherHO-CHUNK NATION: $217,500 · OtherPALA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS: $217,339 · OtherSITKA TRIBE OF ALASKA: $215,008 · OtherINTER TRIBAL COUNCIL OF ARIZONA INC: $212,800 · Other+102 more: $3,154,039 · Other+102 moreALASKA NATIVE TRIBAL HEALTH CONSORTIUM: $489,471 · HealthALASKA NATIVE TRIBAL HEALTH C…TULE RIVER INDIAN HEALTH CENTER INC: $365,000 · HealthTULE RIVER INDIAN HEALTH CENT…GREAT PLAINS TRIBAL LEADERS HEALTH: $350,000 · HealthGREAT PLAINS TRIBAL LEADERS H…CALIFORNIA RURAL INDIAN HEALTH BOARD INC: $172,857 · HealthCALIFORNIA RURAL INDIAN HEALT…NORTHWEST PORTLAND AREA INDIAN HEALTH BOARD: $148,500 · HealthNORTHWEST PORTLAND AREA INDIA…AMERICAN INDIAN CANCER FOUNDATION: $130,000 · HealthAMERICAN INDIAN CANCER FOUNDA…SONOMA COUNTY INDIAN HEALTH PROJECT INC: $128,000 · HealthSONOMA COUNTY INDIAN HEALTH P…United Indian Health Services Inc: $87,250 · HealthTUBA CITY REGIONAL HEALTH CARE CORPORATION: $78,000 · Health+9 more: $255,000 · Health+9 moreNATIONAL OPINION RESEARCH CENTER: $49,000 · Social ScienceNKWUSM: $25,000 · EducationBLACKFEET COMMUNITY COLLEGE: $23,700 · EducationNATIONAL COUNCIL OF URBAN INDIAN HEALTH: $21,000 · Human ServicesManiilaq Association: $15,000 · Human ServicesALEUTIAN PRIBILOF ISLANDS ASSOCIATION INC: $10,000 · Community ImprovementOSAGE NATION FOUNDATION: $5,250 · Community Improvement
Other$6,196,782Health$2,204,078Social Science$49,000Education$48,700Human Services$36,000Community Improvement$15,250

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 budgetALASKA NATIVE TRIBAL HEALTH CONSORTIUM: $489,471 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetUNITED SOUTH AND EASTERN TRIBESINC: $477,800 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetTULE RIVER INDIAN HEALTH CENTER INC: $365,000 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetGREAT PLAINS TRIBAL LEADERS HEALTH: $350,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetINTER TRIBAL COUNCIL OF ARIZONA INC: $212,800 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetCALIFORNIA RURAL INDIAN HEALTH BOARD INC: $172,857 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetNORTHWEST PORTLAND AREA INDIAN HEALTH BOARD: $148,500 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetSONOMA COUNTY INDIAN HEALTH PROJECT INC: $128,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetUnited Indian Health Services Inc: $87,250 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTUBA CITY REGIONAL HEALTH CARE CORPORATION: $78,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Indian Health Service of Chicago: $65,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetSouthern Plains Tribal Health Board Foundation: $65,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetCARDEA SERVICES: $50,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetNATIONAL OPINION RESEARCH CENTER: $49,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNORTON SOUND HEALTH CORPORATION: $45,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetALASKA NATIVE HEALTH BOARD: $40,000 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetAmerican Indian Health Commission: $30,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetNKWUSM: $25,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetBLACKFEET COMMUNITY COLLEGE: $23,700 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetNATIONAL COUNCIL OF URBAN INDIAN HEALTH: $21,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetWINSLOW INDIAN HEALTH CARE CENTER INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetDAY EAGLE HOPE PROJECT: $15,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetManiilaq Association: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTOIYABE INDIAN HEALTH PROJECT: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetALEUTIAN PRIBILOF ISLANDS ASSOCIATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNAVAJO HEALTH FOUNDATION - SAGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLake County Tribal Health Consortium Inc: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSIERRA TRIBAL CONSORTIUM INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetOSAGE NATION FOUNDATION: $5,250 over 1y, 1.6% 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 ALASKA NATIVE TRIBAL HEALTH CONSORTIUM ↗
  • Who funds UNITED SOUTH AND EASTERN TRIBESINC ↗
  • Who funds TULE RIVER INDIAN HEALTH CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds GREAT PLAINS TRIBAL LEADERS HEALTH ↗
  • Who funds INTER TRIBAL COUNCIL OF ARIZONA INC ↗
  • Who funds ALBUQUERQUE AREA INDIAN HEALTH BOARD INC ↗
  • Who funds CALIFORNIA RURAL INDIAN HEALTH BOARD INC ↗
  • Who funds NORTHWEST PORTLAND AREA INDIAN HEALTH BOARD ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN INDIAN CANCER FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SONOMA COUNTY INDIAN HEALTH PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds NORTHWEST TRIBAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds United Indian Health Services Inc ↗
  • Who funds TUBA CITY REGIONAL HEALTH CARE CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds American Indian Health Service of Chicago ↗
  • Who funds Southern Plains Tribal Health Board Foundation ↗
  • Who funds CARDEA SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL OPINION RESEARCH CENTER ↗

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.

First Nations Develop…Association of Tribal…Wounded Warriors Fami…National Congress of …Native American Agric…Indian Land Tenure Fo…Ndn Collective IncThe Notah Begay III F…Northwest Portland Ar…National Association …Great Plains Tribal L…Na'ah Illahee Fund
First Nations Development InstituteCO115.5× affinity64 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: First Nations Development Institute · Association of Tribal Archives Libraries & Museums · Wounded Warriors Family Support Inc · National Congress of American Indians Fund · Native American Agriculture Fund · Indian Land Tenure Foundation · Ndn Collective Inc · The Notah Begay III Foundation Inc · Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board · National Association of Tribal Historic Officers Inc · Great Plains Tribal Leaders Health · Na'ah Illahee Fund

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 National Indian Health Board funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from National Indian Health Board. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 83%
  • Southern Plains Tribal Health Board Foundation: 83% of income from government
  • Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board: 70% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
2rely 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.

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 137 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on National Indian Health Board’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