Skip to content
North American Association of Central Cancer Registries at a glance

· Public charity

North American Association of Central Cancer Registries

Naaccr inc.

$393k
Granted FY2025still arriving
24
Grants FY2025still arriving
24
States reached
$41k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2025.

Health$1.1MArts & Culture$73kPublic Benefit$44kEducation$36kEnvironment$19kOther$0
02FY2025 · 24 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 24 grants below total $376,200, the rows itemized in this filing. The $392,746 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $16,546 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k11 grants · $101k
  • $10k–50k13 grants · $275k
$17,500
Median grant
24
States reached
$3.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CURATORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI$40,600
FLORIDA CANCER DATA SYSTEMUNIVERSITY OF MIAMI ORA$21,800
ARKANSAS DEPT OF HEALTH$21,600
MICHIGAN CANCER SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM$21,600
PENNSYLVANIA CANCER REGISTRY$21,600
OREGON STATE CANCER REGISTRY$21,600
OHIO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH$20,100
PUERTO RICO COMPREHENSIVE CANCER CENTER$19,000
INDIANA STATE CANCER REGISTRY$19,000
MN CANCER REPORTING SYSTEM$18,300
NEVADA CENTRAL CANCER REGISTRY$17,500
WYOMING CANCER SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM$17,500
TRUSTEES OF DARTMOUTH NEW HAMPSHIRE STATE REGISTRY$15,000
NEBRASKA DEPT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES$9,500
ALASKA CANCER REGISTRYHAVRS$9,500
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY21–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 76% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%PENNSYLVANIA CANCER REGISTRY: $22k → 12%OKLAHOMA CENTRAL CANCER REGISTRY: $10k → 16%SOUTH CAROLINA DEPT OF HEALTH & ENVIROMENTAL CONTROL: $12k → 16%ARKANSAS DEPT OF HEALTH: $42k → 17%MICHIGAN CANCER SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM: $22k → 16%OREGON STATE CANCER REGISTRY: $10k → 12%RHODE ISLAND GENERAL TREASURER: $14k → 14%COLORADO CENTRAL CANCER REGISTRY: $10k → 12%INDIANA STATE CANCER REGISTRY: $19k → 16%OHIO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH: $25k → 15%OEPS DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY: $10k → 18%ND STATEWIDE CANCER REGISTRY: $9k → 13%VIRGINIA CANCER REGISTRY: $14k → 22%NEVADA CENTRAL CANCER REGISTRY: $18k → 13%TRUSTEES OF DARTMOUTH NEW HAMPSHIRE STATE REGISTRY: $15k → 10%PENNSYLVANIA CANCER REGISTRY: $22k → 12%OKLAHOMA STATE DEPT OF HEALTH: $7k → 16%SOUTH CAROLINA CENTRAL CANCER REGISTRY: $10k → 16%ARKANSAS DEPT OF HEALTH: $22k → 17%OREGON STATE CANCER REGISTRY: $7k → 12%RHODE ISLAND GENERAL TREASURER: $9k → 14%COLORADO CENTRAL CANCER REGISTRY: $7k → 12%INDIANA STATE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH: $7k → 16%OHIO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH: $23k → 15%OEPS DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY: $9k → 18%NORTH DAKOTA STATEWIDE CANCER REGISTRY: $9k → 13%VIRGINIA CANCER REGISTRY: $10k → 22%NV DIVISION OF PUBLIC & BEHAVIORAL HEALTH: $7k → 13%TRUSTEES OF DARTMOUTH COLLEGENH STATE CANCER REGISTRY: $7k → 10%SOUTH CAROLINA CENTRAL CANCER REGISTRY: $10k → 16%ARKANSAS DEPT OF HEALTHHEALTH STATISTICS: $7k → 17%OREGON STATE CANCER REGISTRY: $26k → 12%RHODE ISLAND GENERAL TREASURER: $8k → 14%INDIANA STATE CANCER REGISTRY: $7k → 16%OHIO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH: $20k → 15%OEPS DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY: $8k → 18%ND STATEWIDE CANCER REGISTRY: $9k → 13%VIRGINIA CANCER REGISTRY: $9k → 22%TRUSTEES OF DARTMOUTH NEW HAMPSHIRE STATE REGISTRY: $7k → 10%SC DEPT OF HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL: $7k → 16%OREGON STATE CANCER REGISTRY: $22k → 12%RHODE ISLAND GENERAL TREASURER: $7k → 14%INDIANA STATE CANCER REGISTRY: $7k → 16%OHIO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH: $20k → 15%WV OEPS DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY: $7k → 18%ND STATEWIDE CANCER REGISTRY: $8k → 13%VIRGINIA CANCER REGISTRY: $8k → 22%OHIO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH: $18k → 15%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
ME
NH
MT
ND
MN
IL
WI
MI
OR
NV
WY
IN
OH
PA
NJ
RI
CA
CO
NE
MO
WV
VA
AR
TN
NC
SC
OK
GA
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.
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.
$930k · 24 repeat orgs$316k to everyone else

24 repeat relationships: 22 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

24
24

Total granted

$930k
$298k

Still filing today

4%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $18k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time
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

  • SO
    STATE OF OHIO
    4× · 2022–2025 · $81k
  • AD
    ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
    2× · 2024–2025 · $64k
  • UO
    University of Miami
    3× · 2023–2025 · $61k · revenue +19%

Funded once

  • NC
    NORTH CAROLINA CENTRAL CANCER REGISTRY
    one grant, 2021 · $29k
  • OD
    OHIO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
    one grant, 2021 · $25k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $21k
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
04the grantee network

2 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. 2 of the 50 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
2/2
Grantees still filing
2/2
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

STATE OF OHIO: $80,850 · OtherSTATE OF OHIOARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH: $63,600 · OtherARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCURATORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI: $54,600 · OtherOREGON HEALTH AUTHORITY PUBLIC HEALTH DIVISION: $54,600 · OtherPENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH: $43,100 · OtherCENTRO DE CANCER DE LA UNIVERSIDAD DE PUERTO RICO: $41,450 · OtherNEBRASKA GAME AND PARKS COMMISSION: $39,950 · OtherVIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND RECREATION: $39,950 · OtherMICHIGAN DEP OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES: $39,600 · Other+39 more: $726,550 · Other+39 moreUniversity of Miami: $61,300 · EducationTrustees of Dartmouth College: $29,000 · Education
Other$1,184,250Education$90,300

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

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUniversity of Miami: $61,300 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTrustees of Dartmouth College: $29,000 over 3y, 0.0% 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 University of Miami ↗
  • Who funds Trustees of Dartmouth College ↗

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.

Association of State …Council of State and …Association of Public…Investor Protection T…National Fish and Wil…American Bar Associat…Association of Matern…Recreational Boating …The Pew Charitable Tr…National Assembly of …The Institute for Int…The Mental Health Ass…
Association of State and Territorial Health OfficialsVA36.8× affinity15 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Association of State and Territorial Health Officials · Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists Inc · Association of Public Health Laboratories Inc · Investor Protection Trust · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · American Bar Association · Association of Maternal and Child Health Programs · Recreational Boating and Fishing Foundation · The Pew Charitable Trusts · National Assembly of State Arts Agencies Inc · The Institute for Intergovernmental Research Inc · The Mental Health Association of New York City 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 North American Association of Central Cancer Registries funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →median 5%
  • University of Miami: 5% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to North American Association of Central Cancer Registries?

Find your warmest path to North American Association of Central Cancer Registries 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 50 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 North American Association of Central Cancer Registries’ 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