Skip to content
Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease at a glance

· Public charity

Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease

Disseminating information to educate members of the public about chronic disease and potential solutions for individuals and communities.

$145k
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$75k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead
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 2024.

Health$1.4MPublic Benefit$255k
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $140,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $145,000 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $5,000 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 · FY2024

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $65k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $75k
$40,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NATIONAL MINORITY QUALITY FORUM INC$75,000
GOVERNORS CUP FOUNDATION$40,000
A PHILLIP RANDOLPH INSTITUTE$25,000
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%MINORITY HEALTH INSTITUTE INC: $10k → 14%GOVERNOR'S CUP FOUNDATION INC: $40k → 16%NATIONAL MINORITY QUALITY FORUM INC: $75k → 14%One in Four Chronic Health: $105k → 12%KENT COUNTY MEDICAL SOCIETY: $25k → 13%GOVERNOR'S CUP FOUNDATION INC: $40k → 16%COUNCIL FOR AFFORDABLE HEALTH COVERAGE: $15k → 14%GOVERNOR'S CUP FOUNDATION INC: $40k → 16%PARTNERSHIP TO FIGHT INFECTIOUS DISEASE: $1.2M → 14%GOVERNOR'S CUP FOUNDATION INC: $40k → 16%A PHILLIP RANDOLPH INSTITUTE: $25k → 14%GOVERNORS CUP FOUNDATION: $40k → 16%Governors Cup Foundation Inc: $35k → 16%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

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Race and Health Foundation
Health
2
Physicians for a National Health Program Minnesota

Physicians for a National Health Program is a non-profit research & education organization of physicians, medical students & health professionals who support single-payer national health insurance.

—
3
Health Care Cost Institute Inc
Health
4
National Minority Quality Forum Action Network

Nmqf action network's mission is to advocate for a transformation of our legacy healthcare finance, research, and delivery systems so that the prime directive of the new system is to reduce patient risk for poor health outcomes while…

—
5
National Institute for African American Health

Improving health of african americans

Health
6
National Health Forum Inc

To improve health care for indigent population and to educate health care providers to know the issues and to promote medical eduudcation and research

International
7
90-10instituteorg

create a new industry model to bring more affordable medicine to more people

—
8
Healthcare Partners Institute for
Education
9
African-American Health Institute

To eliminate disparities in health by advocating within systems to implement sound and meaningful policies, based on agreed-upon indicators of change, to improve the health of african americans.

Health
10
Accountable for Health Institute
Human Services
11
Preventive Medicine Research Institute

Preventive Medicine Research Institute is a pioneer in scientific research investigating the effects of diet and lifestyle choices on health and disease. Our work is grounded in compassion and dedication to service. PMRI achieves its…

Health
12
Integrative Healthcare Policy Consortium

Activities to advance integrated healthcare nationally including educational conferencing and research priorities.

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Partnership to Fight Infectious Disease; the most unlike its peers is Institute for Global Health & Health Policy. 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

8 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. 8 of the 11 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PARTNERSHIP TO FIGHT INFECTIOUS DISEASE: $1,168,500 · OtherPARTNERSHIP TO FIGHT INFECTIOUS DISEASEOne in Four Chronic Health: $105,000 · OtherOne in Four Chronic HealthNATIONAL MINORITY QUALITY FORUM INC: $75,000 · Other+5 more: $85,000 · Other+5 moreGOVERNORS CUP FOUNDATION INC: $235,000 · Public BenefitGOVERNORS CUP F…COUNCIL FOR AFFORDABLE HEALTH COVERAGE: $15,000 · Community ImprovementINSTITUTE FOR GLOBAL HEALTH & HEALTH POLICY: $5,000 · Health
Other$1,433,500Public Benefit$235,000Community Improvement$15,000Health$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetGOVERNORS CUP FOUNDATION INC: $235,000 over 6y, 42% of budgetNATIONAL MINORITY QUALITY FORUM INC: $75,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetA PHILIP RANDOLPH INSTITUTE: $25,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetCLARK COUNTY MEDICAL SOCIETY INC: $25,000 over 1y, 7.7% of budgetCOUNCIL FOR AFFORDABLE HEALTH COVERAGE: $15,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetMINORITY HEALTH INSTITUTE: $10,000 over 1y, 6.6% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR GLOBAL HEALTH & HEALTH POLICY: $5,000 over 1y, 13% 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Pharmaceutical Resear…
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of AmericaDC13.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America

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 Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s 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 · 0–40%
    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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease?

    Find your warmest path to Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease 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 11 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease’s 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