Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Natural Health Research Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$590k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$360k
Largest
01What you fund
0199% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Environment$6.3MHealth$5.0MAnimals$532kFood & Nutrition$300kInternational$50kPhilanthropy$31kEducation$4kHuman Services$3kOther$0
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $50k–250k1 grant · $230k
  • $250k+1 grant · $360k
$360,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$2.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ORGANIC CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION$360,000
CONSUMERS FOR DENTAL CHOICE$230,030
02The need
03

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 (FY23–23, $31k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%TIDES CENTER: $31k → 10%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 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

MN
IL
WI
NY
MA
SD
IA
CA
CO
VA
AZ
DC
FL

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.

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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$12M · 16 repeat orgs$169k to everyone else

16 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2025, 14 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
9

Total granted

$12M
$169k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+4%
+266%

Still filing today

38%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’25
HealthFood & NutritionInternationalPublic BenefitAnimalsOther

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

  • NV
    NATIONAL VACCINE INFORMATION CENTER
    7× · 2017–2023 · $2.9M · revenue +42% · 39% of their budget
  • CF
    CONSUMERS FOR DENTAL CHOICE INC
    8× · 2017–2025 · $1.9M · revenue +4% · 50% of their budget
  • CD
    CAMINOS DE AGUA
    5× · 2017–2021 · $260k · revenue +174% · 33% of their budget

Funded once

  • HR
    Health Research Institute
    one grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue -5%
  • RI
    REGENERATION INTERNATIONALgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $50k · revenue +288% · 25% of their budget
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2018 · $40k

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.

1
Agricultural Health Benefits Alliance Educational Foundation Llc
Education
2
Gdp Research Alliance

The GDP Research Alliance (GDPRA) is a newly organized D.C. non-profit corporation that was formed exclusively for research, development, and educational purposes.

Science & Tech
3
The Food Alliance

Food alliance works at the juncture of science, business and values to define and promote sustainability in agriculture and the food industry, and to ensure safe and fair working conditions, humane treatment of animals, and careful…

Arts & Culture
4
Organic Farmers Association

The mission of the Organic Farmers Association is to provide a strong and unified national voice for domestic certified organic producers so that organic agriculture will become the basis of a viable United States food and agricultural…

Food & Nutrition
5
Center for Responsible Science
Philanthropy
6
Sustainable Food Alliance Inc

To educate the public about the positive health and environmental benefits of organic food and farming.

Environment
7
T Colin Campbell Center for Nutrition Studies
Philanthropy
8
Grow More Foundation

Grow More Foundations mission is to provide education, promote awareness and establish transparency of biotechnological innovations in agriculture. Unlike technological and biomedical advances, biotechnological innovations are not so…

Food & Nutrition
9
Healthy Air Research and Certification Authority Inc
Environment
10
True Organic Inc

Scientific Research and Education

Food & Nutrition
11
Animal Agriculture Alliance

The animal agriculture alliance is a nonprofit organization that helps bridge the communication gap between farm and fork. we connect food industry stakeholders, engage food chain influencers and promote consumer choice by helping key…

Food & Nutrition
12
Scientific Alliance for Education

Information and service projects concerning EMFs, GMO and health

Health

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Grassrootshealth and the most unlike its peers is Companion Animal Nutrition and Wellness Institute Inc. 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

13 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 13 of the 26 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.

7
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
8/13
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

ORGANIC CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION — $5,590,130 · Public BenefitORGANIC CONSUMERS ASSOCIATIONNATIONAL VACCINE INFORMATION CENTER — $2,866,017 · OtherNATIONAL VACCINE INFORMATION CENTE…MERCURY POLICY PROJECT TIDES — $247,000 · OtherMERCURY POLICY PROJECT TIDESAMERICAN NUTRITIONAL ASSOCIATION — $163,002 · OtherAMERICAN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH STUDI — $160,000 · Other+11 more — $267,697 · Other+11 moreCONSUMERS FOR DENTAL CHOICE INC — $1,899,030 · HealthCONSUMERS FOR DENTA…GRASSROOTSHEALTH — $220,000 · HealthGRASSROOTSHEALTH+1 more — $1,000 · HealthCOMPANION ANIMAL NUTRITION AND WELLNESS INSTITUTE INC — $445,000 · AnimalsCAMINOS DE AGUA — $260,000 · InternationalREGENERATION INTERNATIONAL — $50,000 · InternationalHealth Research Institute — $50,000 · Food & NutritionILLINOIS STEWARDSHIP ALLIANCE — $9,800 · Food & NutritionBIODYNAMIC ASSOCIATION INC — $5,000 · Food & NutritionTIDES CENTER — $31,000 · Human Services
Public Benefit$5,590,130Other$3,703,716Health$2,120,030Animals$445,000International$310,000Food & Nutrition$64,800Human Services$31,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetORGANIC CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION — $5,590,130 over 8y, 41% of budgetNATIONAL VACCINE INFORMATION CENTER — $2,866,017 over 7y, 39% of budgetCONSUMERS FOR DENTAL CHOICE INC — $1,899,030 over 8y, 50% of budgetCOMPANION ANIMAL NUTRITION AND WELLNESS INSTITUTE INC — $445,000 over 7y, 67% of budgetCAMINOS DE AGUA — $260,000 over 5y, 33% of budgetGRASSROOTSHEALTH — $220,000 over 2y, 34% of budgetHealth Research Institute — $50,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetREGENERATION INTERNATIONAL — $50,000 over 1y, 25% of budgetTIDES CENTER — $31,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetILLINOIS STEWARDSHIP ALLIANCE — $9,800 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetBIODYNAMIC ASSOCIATION INC — $5,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetMoms Across America — $2,500 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetNATIONAL HEALTH FREEDOM COALITION — $1,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budget
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 ORGANIC CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION
  • Who funds NATIONAL VACCINE INFORMATION CENTER
  • Who funds CONSUMERS FOR DENTAL CHOICE INC
  • Who funds COMPANION ANIMAL NUTRITION AND WELLNESS INSTITUTE INC
  • Who funds CAMINOS DE AGUA
  • Who funds GRASSROOTSHEALTH
  • Who funds Health Research Institute
  • Who funds REGENERATION INTERNATIONAL
  • Who funds TIDES CENTER
  • Who funds ILLINOIS STEWARDSHIP ALLIANCE
  • Who funds BIODYNAMIC ASSOCIATION INC
  • Who funds Moms Across America
  • Who funds NATIONAL HEALTH FREEDOM COALITION

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.

Rsf Social Finance IncCA13.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Rsf Social Finance Inc · Patagoniaorg · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Natural Health Research Foundation 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
202122232425
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    2report 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, FY2025

    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Natural Health Research Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Natural Health Research Foundation 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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 26 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph