· Public charity
National Rural Health Association
The association's mission is to provide leadership on rural health issues through advocacy, communications, education, and research.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k37 grants · $456k
- $50k–250k5 grants · $478k
- $250k+3 grants · $1.5M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| STROUDWATER ASSOCIATES | $724,077 |
| EIDE BAILLY LLP | $414,299 |
| 3RNET-NATIONAL RURAL RECRUITMENT | $398,911 |
| FORVIS | $139,966 |
| WIPFLI | $117,720 |
| TEXAS A&M HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER | $99,999 |
| NEW ENGLAND RURAL HEALTH ASSOCIATIO | $60,000 |
| AGRISAFE NETWORK | $60,000 |
| LOUISANA RURAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION | $21,000 |
| RURAL HEALTH ASSOC OF UTAH | $20,000 |
| COLORADO RURAL HEALTH CENTER | $20,000 |
| NEBRASKA RURAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION | $20,000 |
| WEST VIRGINIA RURAL HEALTH ASSOC | $20,000 |
| GEORGIA RURAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION | $15,000 |
| INDIANA RURAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION | $15,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 47% 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
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 +83% since the first grant, against +65% for the ones you funded once.
48 repeat relationships — 40 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 4 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, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $148k 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
- NRNATIONAL RURAL RECRUITMENT & RETENTION NETWORK INC7× · 2017–2024 · $1.7M · revenue +47% · 39% of their budget
FOUNDATION FOR HEALTH LEADERSHIP AND INNOVATION7× · 2017–2024 · $776k · revenue +174%- ANAGRISAFE NETWORK INC8× · 2017–2024 · $510k · revenue +251%
Funded once
- USUSC School of Medicine Greenvilleone grant, 2021 · $175k
- UOUNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMAone grant, 2017 · $110k
- TMTEN MILE ENTERPRISES LLCone 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.
To establish an association which will assist rural health clinics in improving the delivery of cost effective health care in rural under-served areas.
The mission of the arkansas rural health partnership is to create and implement sustainable community solutions to improve the southeast arkansas delta's rural health care infrastructure by improving access to health care services,…
The foundation was created to elevate aspiring rural health leaders by reinforcing supported programs that educate rural health professionals on best practices, both in rural facilities and in washington dc.
The association's mission is to provide leadership on rural health issues through advocacy, communications, education, and research.
To provide services to small rural hospitals that otherwise would be unavailable or cost prohibitive to the residents of our trade area.
Public education on health issues
A network consisting of a teaching hospital, rural hospitals, a psychiatric hospital, community health centers, health departments, community mental health facilities, and an areomedical service to assist its members in improving the…
The rhode island public health association (ripha) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit, tax-exempt, professional organization that works toward the advancement of public health. ripha is the rhode island affiliate of the american public health…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Missouri Rural Health Association and the most unlike its peers is Edward Via Virginia College of Osteopathic Medicine. 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 27 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) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 1% 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.
37 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. 37 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 NATIONAL RURAL RECRUITMENT & RETENTION NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION FOR HEALTH LEADERSHIP AND INNOVATION ↗
- Who funds AGRISAFE NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds NEW ENGLAND RURAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds National Cooperative of Health Networks Assoc ↗
- Who funds EDWARD VIA VIRGINIA COLLEGE OF OSTEOPATHIC MEDICINE ↗
- Who funds AZRHA INC ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA RURAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds LOUISIANA RURAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds WEST VIRGINIA RURAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds TEXAS RURAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds RURAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION OF TE ↗
- Who funds MARYLAND RURAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds NEW YORK STATE ASSOCIATION FOR RURAL HEALTH INC ↗
- Who funds COLORADO RURAL HEALTH CENTER ↗
- Who funds MISSOURI RURAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds IOWA RURAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds INDIANA RURAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds HAWAII STATE RURAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds SC Office of Rural Health Inc ↗
- Who funds KENTUCKY RURAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds Va Rural Health Association ↗
- Who funds MINNESOTA RURAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds FLORIDA RURAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds ILLINOIS RURAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION ↗
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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.
Open a dossier: Amazonsmile 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 National Rural Health Association 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.
- Rural Health Projects Inc — 72% of income from government
- New England Rural Health Association — 61% 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.