Skip to content

· Public charity

Northwestern Medical Center

Northwestern Medical Center's mission is to provide exceptional healthcare for our community.

$92k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$18k
Largest
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 2023.

Health$159kCommunity Improvement$32kRecreation & Sports$7kFood & Nutrition$5k
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $18,012, the rows itemized in this filing. The $91,512 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $73,500 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.
$18,012
Median grant
1
States reached
$185M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Northwestern Counseling & Support Services$18,012
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 (FY17–23, $82k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%Howard Center Inc: $13k → 10%Howard Center Inc: $13k → 10%Howard Center Inc: $12k → 10%Howard Center Inc: $12k → 10%Howard Center Inc: $11k → 10%Howard Center Inc: $11k → 10%Howard Center Inc: $10k → 10%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.
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 field
04the grantee network

5 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. 5 of the 7 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)
5/5
Grantees still filing
3/5
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HowardCenter Inc: $81,950 · Human ServicesHowardCenter IncNorthwest Regional Planning Commission: $60,000 · OtherNorthwest Regional Planning Commis…St Albans Recreation Department: $6,690 · OtherSt Albans Recreation DepartmentCHAMPLAIN VALLEY OFFICE OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY INC: $32,000 · Community ImprovementCHAMPLAIN VALLEY…NORTHWESTERN COUNSELING & SUPPORT SERVICES: $18,012 · HealthNORTHWEST…UNITED WAY OF NORTHWEST VERMONT INC: $17,500 · PhilanthropyMARTHAS KITCHEN: $5,000 · Food & Nutrition
Human Services$81,950Other$66,690Community Improvement$32,000Health$18,012Philanthropy$17,500Food & Nutrition$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetHowardCenter Inc: $81,950 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetCHAMPLAIN VALLEY OFFICE OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY INC: $32,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetNORTHWESTERN COUNSELING & SUPPORT SERVICES: $18,012 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNITED WAY OF NORTHWEST VERMONT INC: $17,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetMARTHAS KITCHEN: $5,000 over 1y, 1.8% 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.

United Way of Northwest Vermont IncVT13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United Way of Northwest Vermont Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Northwestern Medical Center funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Northwestern Medical Center. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 23%
  • United Way of Northwest Vermont Inc: 34% of income from government
  • Champlain Valley Office of Economic Opportunity Inc: 23% of income from government
  • HowardCenter Inc: 8% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
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 7 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 Northwestern Medical Center’s filings →

More from the funding graph