Skip to content
Physicians for Social Responsibility at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Physicians for Social Responsibility

Guided by the values and expertise of medicine and public health, PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY works to protect human life from the gravest threats to health and survival.

$98k
Granted FY2019
12
Grants FY2019
11
States reached
$8k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2019.

International$79kHealth$58kPublic Benefit$49kEnvironment$46kPublic Safety & Disaster$23kArts & Culture$21kCivil Rights$16k
02FY2019 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 12 grants below total $85,798, the rows itemized in this filing. The $98,096 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $12,298 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.
$7,055
Median grant
11
States reached
$500k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PSR FLORIDA$8,460
PSR OREGON$8,143
PSR WASHINGTON$8,136
PSR SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA$8,058
PSR MAINE$7,818
PSR LOS ANGELES$7,055
PSR IOWA$7,044
PSR WISCONSIN$6,844
PSR TEXAS$6,670
PSR PHILADELPHIA$6,235
PSR BOSTON$6,041
PSR ARIZONA$5,294
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 (FY17–19) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 54% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 11%PSR ARIZONA: $6k → 15%PSR BOSTON: $7k → 16%PSR PHILADELPHIA: $7k → 22%PSR SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA: $11k → 10%PSR LOS ANGELES: $9k → 14%PSR TEXAS: $7k → 10%PSR IOWA: $8k → 15%PSR WISCONSIN: $8k → 10%PSR OREGON: $9k → 12%PSR TENNESSEE: $23k → 14%PSR WASHINGTON: $10k → 9%PSR MAINE: $9k → 7%PSR ARIZONA: $5k → 15%PSR BOSTON: $6k → 16%PSR PHILADELPHIA: $6k → 22%PSR SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA: $10k → 10%PSR LOS ANGELES: $8k → 14%PSR TEXAS: $7k → 10%PSR IOWA: $7k → 15%PSR WISCONSIN: $7k → 10%PSR OREGON: $8k → 12%PSR WASHINGTON: $9k → 9%PSR MAINE: $8k → 7%PSR ARIZONA: $5k → 15%PSR PHILADELPHIA: $6k → 22%PSR SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA: $8k → 10%PSR LOS ANGELES: $7k → 14%PSR TEXAS: $7k → 10%PSR IOWA: $7k → 15%PSR WISCONSIN: $7k → 10%PSR OREGON: $8k → 12%PSR WASHINGTON: $8k → 9%PSR MAINE: $8k → 7%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

ME
WA
WI
MA
OR
IA
PA
CA
AZ
TN
TX
FL
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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$269k · 12 repeat orgs$23k to everyone else

12 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2019, 0 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
1

Total granted

$269k
$23k

Still filing today

58%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2019, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19
InternationalEnvironmentHealthOther
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

  • PF
    Physicians for Social Responsibility - San Francisco Bay Area Chapter
    3× · 2017–2019 · $29k · revenue +811%
  • PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
    3× · 2017–2019 · $24k · revenue +423%
  • PF
    PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY PENNSYLVANIA
    3× · 2017–2019 · $19k · revenue +451%

Funded once

  • PT
    PSR TENNESSEE
    one grant, 2018 · $23k
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

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
Physicians for Social Responsibility Inc

Physicians for Responsibility, Inc. (also known as Physicians for Social Responsibility/NYC or Physicians for Social Responsibility - New York) is committed to the elimination of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, the…

International
2
Physicians for Palestine
Health
3
Physicians for Social Responsibility Inc

Physicians for Social Responsibility works to protect human life from the gravest threats to health and survival. PSR Colorado works to elevate the voice of health professionals to protect the public from the health impacts of hydraulic…

—
4
Center for Responsible Science
Philanthropy
5
Physicians for Social Responsibility Chesapeake Inc

Address global warming and toxic degradation of the environment, promote safe energy, work for peace and justice.

—
6
Texas Physicians for Social Responsibility

Texas physicians for social reponsibility works statewide to protect human life from threats to health trough outreach, education, and advocacy.

Human Services
7
Psychotherapy Action Network
Health
8
Physicians for Social Responsibility Inc Physicians for Social Responsibility Inc Harrisburg Peace Garden Assn I

maintain Peace Garden

—
9
Savannah River Site Watch
Environment
10
Outrider Foundation Inc
Environment
11
Peoples Science Network

The Peoples Science Network was established to support encourage and promote science and the related work of scientists activists and culture workers for the benefit of the public

Science & Tech
12
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.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Physicians for Social Responsibility - San Francisco Bay Area Chapter; the most unlike its peers is Physicians for Social Responsibility. 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 13 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
4/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PSR FLORIDA: $26,724 · OtherPSR FLORIDAPSR TENNESSEE: $23,311 · OtherPSR TENNESSEEPHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY INC: $22,097 · OtherPHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY INCPhysicians For Social Responsibility Wisconsin Inc: $21,665 · OtherPhysicians For Social Responsibility Wisconsin IncPHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: $20,582 · OtherPHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITYPHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY INC: $16,461 · OtherPHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY INCPhysicians for Social Responsibility - San Francisco Bay Area Chapter: $28,541 · InternationalPhysicians for Social Responsibilit…Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility: $26,673 · InternationalWashington Physicians for Social Re…PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: $23,726 · InternationalPHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILIT…PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: $12,726 · InternationalPHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILIT…Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility: $25,996 · EnvironmentOregon Physicians f…PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY INC: $24,581 · EnvironmentPHYSICIANS FOR SOCI…PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY PENNSYLVANIA: $19,383 · Health
Other$130,840International$91,666Environment$50,577Health$19,383

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPhysicians for Social Responsibility - San Francisco Bay Area Chapter: $28,541 over 3y, 17% of budgetWashington Physicians for Social Responsibility: $26,673 over 3y, 3.5% of budgetOregon Physicians for Social Responsibility: $25,996 over 3y, 2.4% of budgetPHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: $23,726 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetPhysicians For Social Responsibility Wisconsin Inc: $21,665 over 3y, 13% of budgetPHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY PENNSYLVANIA: $19,383 over 3y, 5.3% of budgetPHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: $12,726 over 2y, 0.5% 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.

Amazonsmile Foundation
Amazonsmile FoundationWA1.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Physicians for Social Responsibility funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Physicians for Social Responsibility. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 13 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 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2019, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Physicians for Social Responsibility’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