How much did NETWORK FOR REGIONAL HEALTHCARE grant in FY2019?

NETWORK FOR REGIONAL HEALTHCARE reported 9 grants totaling $96,658 in its FY2019 IRS filing.

Where is NETWORK FOR REGIONAL HEALTHCARE based?

NETWORK FOR REGIONAL HEALTHCARE is based in ME.

NETWORK FOR REGIONAL HEALTHCARE

Foundation Dossiers Mostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →

· Public charity

NETWORK FOR REGIONAL HEALTHCARE

Civitas networks for health is a national collaborative comprised of member organizations working to use health information exchange, health data, and multi-stakeholder, cross-sector approaches to improve health.

$97k

Granted FY2019

Grants

Communities

$20k

Largest

01What you fund

What you funded, over time

By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 45% of CIVITAS NETWORKS FOR HEALTH’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02FY2019 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2019

Under $10k4 grants · $23k
$10k–50k5 grants · $69k

$10,000

Median grant

States reached

$3.1M

Total assets

Largest grants

COMAGINE HEALTH$20,000
HEALTH COLLABORATIVE$16,143
INSTITUTE FOR CLINICAL SYSTEMS IMPROVEMENT (ICSI)$12,500
GREATER DETROIT AREA HEALTH COUNCIL$10,620
MARYLAND HEALTH CARE COMMISSION (MHCC)$10,000
MASSACHUTTES HEALTH QUALITY PARTNERS (MHQP)$6,429
WASHINGTON HEALTH ALLIANCE (WHA)$6,428
KENTUCKIANA HEALTH COLLABORATIVE$5,541
VIRGINIA HEALTH INFORMATION$5,000

02The need

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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–19) land where the poverty rate runs at 11% — the area typically sits at 9%. 68% of your dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

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 line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

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, United Way ALICE — 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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$1.2M · 14 repeat orgs$90k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +4% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.

14 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2019, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$1.2M

$70k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+4%

Still filing today

71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2019, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

HealthEducationScience & TechOther

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

CF
CENTER FOR IMPROVING VALUE IN HEALTHCARE
2× · 2017–2018 · $150k · revenue +130%
MH
MIDWEST HEALTH INITIATIVE
2× · 2017–2018 · $125k · revenue +17%
MH
MASSACHUTTES HEALTH QUALITY PARTNERS
3× · 2017–2019 · $76k · revenue +56%

Funded once

OH
OREGON HEALTH CARE QUALITY CORPORATION (Q CORP)
one grant, 2017 · $70k

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.

Institute for Healthcare Improvement

To improve health and health care worldwide.

Civil Rights

Dartmouth-Hitchcock Clinic

Advancing health through research, education, clinical practice, and community partnerships; providing each person the best care in the right place, at the right time, every time.

Health

Massachusetts E-Health Collaborative

—

Health Markets Policy Network

Education and networking organization to promote fellowship and collaboration among health care leaders who studyeffects of health care policy on the health care marketplace. The organization will promote their work and engage media t…

Health

National Coalition On Health Care

The mission of the national coalition on health care (nchc) is to support research and analysis, develop and promote policy solutions, build consensus, and engage the public in order to ensure that america has a high quality health system…

Health

Healthcare Executives Coordinating

To advance healthcare leadership and management excellence.

Community Improvement

Commission On Accreditation for Health

Cahiim accredits college level programs in health informatics and health information management.

Education

International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement Inc

To define a global standard set of outcome measures that really matter to patients for the most relevant medical conditions and drive adoption of these measures worldwide to unlock the potential of value-based health care.

Health

Employers Health Coalition Inc

Employers health coalition, inc.'s mission is to create an environment for long-term continuous improvement in the cost-effective delivery of high quality healthcare services for the community.

Health

Kansas Healthcare Collaborative Inc

The Kansas Healthcare Collaborative (KHC) exists to transform health care through patient-centered initiatives that improve quality, safety, and value

Health

Integrated Care Collaboration

ICC is a nonprofit alliance of health care providers in Central Texas dedicated to the collection, analysis and sharing of health information with the goal of improving health care quality and cost efficiency across the continuum of care.

Health

Michigan Health & Hospital Association

To promote the interests of the health care industry.

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Washington Health Alliance and the most unlike its peers is Health Care Improvement Foundation. 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

15 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

11/15

Grantees still filing

8/15

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Health$608,074Other$574,146Education$75,751Science & Tech$28,647

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.

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.

Amazonsmile FoundationWA1× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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 organisation NETWORK FOR REGIONAL HEALTHCARE 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.

2025

’20’21’22’23’24’25

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

0get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%

typical government reliance, FY20–25

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. 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

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: MIDWEST HEALTH INITIATIVE (MHI).

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~8 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 7 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

7 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 300491563 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on MIDWEST HEALTH INITIATIVE (MHI), cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 8 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 10% of their budget — diversified.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Network for Regional Healthcare?

Find your warmest path to Network for Regional Healthcare through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

NETWORK FOR REGIONAL HEALTHCARE

What you funded, over time

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

15 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Network for Regional Healthcare?

More from the funding graph

NETWORK FOR REGIONAL HEALTHCARE

What you funded, over time

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

15 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Network for Regional Healthcare?

More from the funding graph