Skip to content
National Institute for Reproductive Health Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

National Institute for Reproductive Health Inc

National institute for reproductive health, inc.

$1.1M
Granted FY2025still arriving
14
Grants FY2025still arriving
10
States reached
$627k
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 2025.

Health$5.8MCivil Rights$1.3MHuman Services$406kEducation$190kCrime & Legal$105kSocial Science$93kArts & Culture$89kPhilanthropy$68kOther$0
02FY2025 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k10 grants · $280k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $150k
  • $250k+1 grant · $627k
$35,000
Median grant
10
States reached
$5.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH ACTION FUND INC$627,356
LILITH FUND INC PD$50,000
ELEPHANT CIRCLE$50,000
ACCESS REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE$50,000
COLORADO ORGANIZATION FOR LATINA OPPORTUNITY$38,000
REPRODUCTIVE EQUITY NOW FOUNDATION$35,000
PERINATAL HEALTH EQUITY INITIATIVE$35,000
OUR JUSTICE$35,000
CHICAGO SOUTH SIDE BIRTH CENTER$29,875
GIRLS FOR GENDER EQUITY INC$25,000
NANCY DAVIS FOUNDATION$22,500
LOUISIANA ABORTION FUND$22,500
CHICAGO VOLUNTEER DOULAS$20,125
DESERT STAR INSTITUTE FOR FAMILY PLANNING INC$17,000
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 (FY18–25, $287k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 91% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%RESOURCES FOR HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INC: $15k → 22%NAPAWF: $10k → 14%SOUTHERN BIRTH JUSTICE NETWORK: $18k → 15%PRO-CHOICE MISSOURI FOUNDATION: $25k → 21%EL PUEBLO: $25k → 8%YOUNG WOMEN UNITED: $39k → 14%NARAL PRO-CHOICE MISSOURI FOUNDATION: $20k → 21%YOUNG WOMEN UNITED: $33k → 14%NARAL PRO-CHOICE MISSOURI FOUNDATION: $14k → 21%WOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF MISSISSIPPI: $50k → 23%CHICAGO VOLUNTEER DOULAS: $20k → 14%ASIAN PACIFIC COMMUNITY IN ACTION: $20k → 11%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

ME
WA
MT
ND
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
WY
OH
PA
NJ
CT
CA
UT
CO
NE
MO
KY
WV
VA
MD
AZ
NM
KS
TN
NC
DC
HI
LA
MS
GA
TX
FL
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.

83%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$6.8M · 38 repeat orgs$1.4M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +59% since the first grant, against +37% for those funded once.

38 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 31 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

38
55

Total granted

$6.8M
$1.2M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+59%
+37%

Still filing today

97%
84%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $230k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthCivil RightsHuman ServicesArts & CultureEnvironmentCrime & LegalOther
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

  • RE
    REPRODUCTIVE EQUITY NOW FOUNDATION INC
    7× · 2017–2025 · $651k · revenue +1000% · 38% of their budget
  • UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH
    2× · 2021–2022 · $225k · revenue +11%
  • EW
    EMBOLDEN WI INC
    5× · 2017–2022 · $208k · revenue +203%

Funded once

  • UC
    UNIVERSITY CLINICAL EDUCATION & RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
    one grant, 2018 · $87k · revenue -35%
  • WF
    WOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF MISSISSIPPIgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $50k · revenue +34%
  • RO
    REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
    one grant, 2018 · $50k
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
Women's Law Project

Women's law project creates a more just and equitable society by advancing the rights and status of all women throughout their lives. to this end, we engage in high-impact litigation, advocacy, and education. the core values of women's law…

Civil Rights
2
Pro-Choice Arizona

Pro-Choice Arizona centers abolition and reproductive justice values to prioritize community needs. We advance reproductive equity, pregnancy and family justice, and abortion access for all folks living in Arizona through direct service…

Health
3
Forward Together

Forward Together is a national reproductive justice organization that centers people, families, and communities who experience reproductive oppression. They prioritize queer, trans, Black, Indigenous, and other peoples of color and utilize…

Health
4
Guttmacher Institute Inc

The institute is a leading research and policy organization committed to advancing sexual and reproductive health and rights in the united states and globally.

—
5
Health Access Fund

Health Access Fund works to protect the fundamental right of all people to choose and access quality,dignified and affordable reproductive health care.

Health
6
Power to Decide

Power to decide envisions a world where everyone - no matter who they are or where they live - has control over their bodies and can decide if, when, and under what circumstances to get pregnant and have a child. its mission is to advance…

Human Services
7
Pro-Choice Washington

To protect and promote every persons right to access the full range of reproductive healthcare choices in Washington State, including safe and legal abortion, through education, advocacy, lobbying and coalition-building

—
8
Women Winning

To encourage, promote, support, and elect pro-choice women of all political parties to all levels of public office in minnesota.

Public Benefit
9
Abortion Care Network

Abortion care network's unique role in the abortion care community is to support independent abortion care providers and the patients they serve. to do so, we provide direct programming, technical assistance and grants directly to our…

Health
10
Dc Abortion Fund

The DC Abortion Fund helps pay for the abortion care of anyone living in or traveling to the DC Metro region, without restrictions or requirements. DC is a vital access point for the entire East Coast,

Human Services
11
Ibis Reproductive Health Inc

Ibis reproductive health drives change through bold, rigorous research and principled partnerships that advance sexual and reproductive autonomy, choices and health worldwide.

Health
12
National Institute for Reproductive Health Inc

National institute for reproductive health, inc. works to protect and advance equitable access to reproductive health care by building power at the state and local level. using an approach that is rooted in partnerships with state and…

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Reproductive Equity Now Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Avow Foundation for Abortion Access. 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

95 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. 95 of the 103 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.

5
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
39
Early backer (in before they grew)
91/95
Grantees still filing
66/95
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH ACTION FUND INC: $3,048,396 · OtherNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH ACTION FUND INCCHERRY HILL WOMENS CENTER: $267,000 · OtherCHERRY HILL WOMENS CENTER+42 more: $1,445,836 · Other+42 moreEMBOLDEN WI INC: $208,000 · HealthEMBOLDEN WI INCCONVERGE INC: $150,000 · HealthCONVERGE INCDESERT STAR INSTITUTE FOR FAMILY PLANNING INC: $132,000 · HealthDESERT STAR INSTITUT…OUR JUSTICE: $97,500 · HealthOUR JUSTICEUNIVERSITY HEALTH SYSTEM INC: $95,000 · HealthUNIVERSITY HEALTH SY…UNIVERSITY CLINICAL EDUCATION & RESEARCH ASSOCIATES (UCERA): $86,774 · HealthUNIVERSITY CLINICAL …COLORADO ORGANIZATION FOR LATINA OPPORTUNITY AND REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS: $78,000 · HealthIntermountain Planned Parenthood: $64,759 · HealthROCKY MOUNTAIN PLANNED PARENTHOOD INC: $63,000 · HealthWHOLE WOMAN'S HEALTH ALLIANCE: $59,000 · HealthKentucky Health Justice Network Inc: $57,000 · HealthHEALTH EQUITY SOLUTIONS INC: $55,000 · Health+15 more: $377,540 · Health+15 moreREPRODUCTIVE EQUITY NOW FOUNDATION INC: $650,800 · Civil RightsREPRODUCTIVE …COBALT FOUNDATION: $70,000 · Civil RightsCOBALT FOUNDA…THE RECONCILIATION CENTER INC: $60,000 · Civil RightsTHE RECONCILI…MARCH ON MARYLAND: $45,000 · Civil RightsSPARK REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE NOW: $37,500 · Civil RightsSOUTHWEST WOMEN'S LAW CENTER: $33,000 · Civil Rights+6 more: $92,330 · Civil Rights+6 moreBOLD FUTURES NM: $71,500 · Human ServicesAbortion Action Missouri Foundation: $58,500 · Human ServicesWOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF MISSISSIPPI: $50,000 · Human ServicesMICHIGAN ORGANIZATION ON ADOLESCENT SEXUAL HEALTH: $50,000 · Human ServicesEL PUEBLO INC: $25,000 · Human ServicesChicago Volunteer Doulas Inc: $20,125 · Human ServicesASIAN PACIFIC COMMUNITY IN ACTION: $20,000 · Human ServicesAll-Options: $19,000 · Human ServicesSOUTHERN BIRTH JUSTICE NETWORK: $17,500 · Human ServicesResources for Human Development Inc: $14,500 · Human Services+1 more: $10,000 · Human ServicesUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH: $225,000 · EducationSISTERREACH: $95,000 · EducationNew Jersey Policy Perspective: $133,000 · Arts & CultureFRACTURED ATLAS INC: $25,000 · Arts & CultureNARAL Pro-Choice Maryland Fund Inc: $20,000 · Arts & Culture+1 more: $6,000 · Arts & CultureELEPHANT CIRCLE: $50,000 · Crime & LegalGIRLS FOR GENDER EQUITY INC: $45,000 · Crime & LegalGENDER JUSTICE: $20,000 · Crime & Legal
Other$4,761,232Health$1,523,573Civil Rights$988,630Human Services$356,125Education$320,000Arts & Culture$184,000Crime & Legal$115,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH ACTION FUND INC: $3,048,396 over 5y, 87% of budgetREPRODUCTIVE EQUITY NOW FOUNDATION INC: $650,800 over 7y, 38% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH: $225,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEMBOLDEN WI INC: $208,000 over 5y, 6.8% of budgetCONVERGE INC: $150,000 over 2y, 11% of budgetACCESS REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE: $145,000 over 5y, 3.3% of budgetNew Jersey Policy Perspective: $133,000 over 4y, 3.7% of budgetDESERT STAR INSTITUTE FOR FAMILY PLANNING INC: $132,000 over 6y, 23% of budgetPRO-CHOICE CONNECTICUT FOUNDATION INC: $130,000 over 4y, 95% of budgetARIZONA FAMILY HEALTH PARTNERSHIP: $115,000 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetOUR JUSTICE: $97,500 over 4y, 2.7% of budgetUNIVERSITY HEALTH SYSTEM INC: $95,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSISTERREACH: $95,000 over 3y, 7.6% of budgetUNIVERSITY CLINICAL EDUCATION & RESEARCH ASSOCIATES (UCERA): $86,774 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMemphis Center For Reproductive Health Inc: $85,000 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetCOLORADO ORGANIZATION FOR LATINA OPPORTUNITY AND REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS: $78,000 over 4y, 1.6% of budgetBOLD FUTURES NM: $71,500 over 2y, 5.2% of budgetCOBALT FOUNDATION: $70,000 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetIntermountain Planned Parenthood: $64,759 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetROCKY MOUNTAIN PLANNED PARENTHOOD INC: $63,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetEVERTHRIVE ILLINOIS: $62,503 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetTHE RECONCILIATION CENTER INC: $60,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetWHOLE WOMAN'S HEALTH ALLIANCE: $59,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetAbortion Action Missouri Foundation: $58,500 over 3y, 13% of budgetYOUNG WOMEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF KALAMAZOO MI: $57,500 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetKentucky Health Justice Network Inc: $57,000 over 3y, 2.8% of budgetFeminist Womens Health Center Inc: $55,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetHEALTH EQUITY SOLUTIONS INC: $55,000 over 2y, 4.0% of budgetWOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF MISSISSIPPI: $50,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetPUBLIC HEALTH SOLUTIONS: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMICHIGAN ORGANIZATION ON ADOLESCENT SEXUAL HEALTH: $50,000 over 3y, 5.9% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR BLACK WOMEN'S WELLNESS INC: $47,500 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetMARCH ON MARYLAND: $45,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetGIRLS FOR GENDER EQUITY INC: $45,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetTHE ROGER BALDWIN FOUNDATION OF ACLU INC: $40,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetVanderbilt University Medical Center: $40,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWest Fund: $40,000 over 2y, 20% of budgetSPARK REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE NOW: $37,500 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetMEDSTAR HEALTH RESEARCH INSTITUTE INC: $33,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAvow Foundation for Abortion Access: $30,000 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF NEW MEXICO FOUNDATION: $27,500 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetNEO Philanthropy Inc: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRACTURED ATLAS INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSISTERLOVE INCORPORATED: $25,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetFUND FOR THE CITY OF NEW YORK INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEL PUEBLO INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetBLUE MOUNTAIN CLINIC INC: $25,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetNEW YORK ABORTION ACCESS FUND: $25,000 over 1y, 1.4% 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.

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.

The Susan Thompson Bu…Hopewell FundMs Foundation for Wom…Groundswell FundAmalgamated Charitabl…New Venture FundRockefeller Philanthr…National Women's Law …National Network of A…Planned Parenthood Fe…The Prentice Foundati…NEO Philanthropy Inc
The Susan Thompson Buffett FoundationNE69.5× affinity32 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation · Hopewell Fund · Ms Foundation for Women Inc · Groundswell Fund · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · New Venture Fund · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · National Women's Law Center · National Network of Abortion Funds Inc · Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc · The Prentice Foundation Inc · NEO Philanthropy Inc

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 Institute for Reproductive Health Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from National Institute for Reproductive Health Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 80%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 25%
  • Health Care for All Inc: 29% of income from government
  • Medstar Health Research Institute Inc: 25% of income from government
  • Health Equity Solutions Inc: 14% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
8get no government money at all
20report 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.

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 103 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on National Institute for Reproductive Health’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