Skip to content
Rad-Aid International Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Rad-Aid International Inc

To improve and optimize access to medical imaging and radiology in low resource regions of the world for increasing radiology's contribution to global public health initiatives and patient care.

$4.9M
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
7
States reached
$414k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through 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, FY2019 to 2024.

Health$6.1M
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 8 grants below total $1,863,803, the rows itemized in this filing. The $4,946,346 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $3,082,543 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 · $31k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $593k
  • $250k+3 grants · $1.2M
$214,225
Median grant
7
States reached
$14M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DENVER HEALTH AND HOSPITAL AUTHORITY$413,887
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS$413,210
ALABAMA REGIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES$412,264
LONE STAR COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER$214,225
SEA MAR COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS$200,000
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS CANCER CENTER$179,000
BELLIN COLLEGE$16,217
JACKSON PARK HOSPITAL$15,000
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 (FY19–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 86% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%MOUNTAIN PARK HEALTH CENTER: $413k → 11%THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY: $227k → 22%NYU GROSSMAN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE: $500k → 17%LONE STAR COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER: $214k → 9%COMMUNITY OF HOPE: $256k → 14%ALABAMA REGIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES: $111k → 16%BELLIN COLLEGE: $16k → 10%AU MEDICAL ASSOCIATES: $497k → 18%DENVER HEALTH AND HOSPITAL AUTHORITY: $229k → 12%SEA MAR CHC - BURIEN CLINIC: $143k → 9%UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS CANCER CENTER: $213k → 14%BREAST CARE FOR WASHINGTON: $163k → 14%AU HEALTH SYSTEM INC: $252k → 18%SEA MAR COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS: $200k → 9%JACKSON PARK HOSPITAL & MEDICAL CENTER: $556k → 14%BREAST CARE FOR WASHINGTON: $116k → 14%SEATTLE CANCER CARE ALLIANCE: $30k → 9%JACKSON PARK HOSPITAL: $15k → 14%BREAST CARE FOR WASHINGTON: $94k → 14%BREAST CARE FOR WASHINGTON: $8k → 14%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

WA
IL
WI
NY
PA
CA
CO
AZ
DC
AL
GA
TX

Grants abroad, by region: $944k on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 5 regions, $935k to organizations and $9k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

South Asia$331k · 35% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: RAD-AID TELE-ULTRASOUND PROGRAM- NEPAL

East Asia and the Pacific$308k · 33% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: RAD-AID TELE-ULTRASOUND PROGRAM- LAOS · RAD-AID TELE-ULTRASOUND PROGRAM- SOUTH PACIFIC

Sub-Saharan Africa$170k · 18% · 4 grants · 10 people

Stated purpose: HEALTH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FOR MEDICAL IMAGING- ETHIOPIA · HEALTH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FOR MEDICAL IMAGING + INTERVENTIONAL RADIOLOGY + RADIATION ONCOLOGY SUPPLIES- KENYA · HEALTH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FOR MEDICAL IMAGING- MALAWI

North America (Canada and Mexico)$99k · 10% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: RAD-AID TELE-ULTRASOUND MIDWIFERY PROGRAM- CANADA

Russia and Neighboring States$36k · 4% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: HEALTH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FOR MEDICAL IMAGING FOR UKRAINE

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

50%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.0M · 6 repeat orgs$3.1M to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
9

Total granted

$3.0M
$2.4M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-15%
+24%

Still filing today

67%
89%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 65% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $644k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthEducationCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • DH
    Denver Health and Hospital Authority
    2× · 2020–2024 · $806k
  • JP
    JACKSON PARK HOSPITAL FOUNDATION
    2× · 2021–2024 · $571k · revenue -15%
  • AR
    ALABAMA REGIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES
    2× · 2022–2024 · $523k · revenue -21%

Funded once

  • NY
    NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE
    one grant, 2021 · $500k
  • AM
    AU MEDICAL ASSOCIATES INC
    2× · 2021–2022 · $497k · revenue -84%
  • MP
    MOUNTAIN PARK HEALTH CENTER
    one grant, 2021 · $413k · revenue +24%
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
Wellstar Health System Inc

Vision: deliver world-class healthcare to every person, every time. mission: to enhance the health and well-being of every person we serve. values: we serve with compassion. we pursue excellence. we honor every voice. form 990, part iii,…

Health
2
Kennestone Hospital Inc

Vision: deliver world-class healthcare to every person, every time. mission: to enhance the health and well-being of every person we serve. values: we serve with compassion. we pursue excellence. we honor every voice. form 990, part iii,…

Health
3
Wellstar Sylvan Grove Hospital

Vision: deliver world-class healthcare to every person, every time. mission: to enhance the health and well-being of every person we serve. values: we serve with compassion. we pursue excellence. we honor every voice. form 990, part iii,…

Health
4
Au Medical Center Inc

Vision: deliver world-class healthcare to every person, every time. mission: to enhance the health and well-being of every person we serve. values: we serve with compassion. we pursue excellence. we honor every voice. form 990, part iii,…

Education
5
Johns Hopkins Health System Corporation

Johns hopkins health system corporation provides centralized management of a multi-hospital healthcare system. it is a key component of johns hopkins medicine, a collaboration with the johns hopkins university school of medicine.

Health
6
West Georgia Medical Center Inc

Vision: deliver world-class healthcare to every person, every time. mission: to enhance the health and well-being of every person we serve. values: we serve with compassion. we pursue excellence. we honor every voice. form 990, part iii,…

Health
7
Truman Medical Center Incorporated

University health is an academic health center providing accessible, state-of-the-art quality healthcare to our community regardless of the ability to pay.

Health
8
Mass General Brigham Incorporated & Affiliates Group Return

Mass general brigham incorporated is developing an integrated health care delivery system throughout the region that offers patients a continuum of coordinated, high-quality care.

Health
9
The Johns Hopkins Hospital

For more than 125 years, the mission of the johns hopkins hospital has been to lead the world in the diagnosis and treatment of disease and to train tomorrow's great physicians, nurses and scientists. above all, we aim to provide the…

Health
10
Sutter Bay Hospitals

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
11
Rex Hospital Inc

To improve the health and well-being of north carolinians and others whom we serve. we accomplish this by providing leadership and excellence in the interrelated areas of patient care, education, and research.

Health
12
University of Chicago Medical Center

Our mission at the university of chicago medicine is to provide superior health care through rigorous research, innovative education, and comprehensive care and healing. in partnership with our colleagues, we pursue life-changing…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Lone Star Community Health Center; the most unlike its peers is Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center. 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

16 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. 16 of the 18 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)
16/16
Grantees still filing
7/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

JACKSON PARK HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $571,200 · HealthJACKSON PARK HOSPITAL FOUNDATIONALABAMA REGIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES: $523,264 · HealthALABAMA REGIONAL MEDICAL SERVICESAU MEDICAL ASSOCIATES INC: $497,300 · HealthAU MEDICAL ASSOCIATES INCMOUNTAIN PARK HEALTH CENTER: $412,730 · HealthMOUNTAIN PARK HEALTH CENTERBREAST CARE FOR WASHINGTON: $381,128 · HealthBREAST CARE FOR WASHINGTONSEA MAR COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS: $343,000 · HealthSEA MAR COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERSLONE STAR COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER: $214,225 · HealthLONE STAR COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER+2 more: $35,919 · HealthDenver Health and Hospital Authority: $805,724 · OtherDenver Health and Hospital AuthorityNEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE: $500,000 · OtherNEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINEUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS: $413,210 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVISTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS: $392,215 · OtherTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLIN…WELLSTAR MCG HEALTH INC: $252,000 · OtherWELLSTAR MCG HEALTH INCDENVER HEALTH AND HOSPITALS FOUNDATION: $229,209 · OtherDENVER HEALTH AND HOSPITALS FOUNDATION+1 more: $16,217 · OtherCOMMUNITY OF HOPE: $256,225 · Community ImprovementTHOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY: $226,881 · Education
Health$2,978,766Other$2,608,575Community Improvement$256,225Education$226,881

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetJACKSON PARK HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $571,200 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetALABAMA REGIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES: $523,264 over 2y, 4.5% of budgetAU MEDICAL ASSOCIATES INC: $497,300 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetMOUNTAIN PARK HEALTH CENTER: $412,730 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetBREAST CARE FOR WASHINGTON: $381,128 over 5y, 16% of budgetSEA MAR COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS: $343,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY OF HOPE: $256,225 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetDENVER HEALTH AND HOSPITALS FOUNDATION: $229,209 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetTHOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY: $226,881 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLONE STAR COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER: $214,225 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetFred Hutchinson Cancer Center: $30,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBELLIN COLLEGE INC: $16,217 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUTMB HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS INC: $5,919 over 1y, 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.

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.

American Cancer Socie…Direct ReliefThe Bank of America C…Amazonsmile Foundation
American Cancer Society IncGA17.3× affinity6 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Cancer Society Inc · Direct Relief · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · 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 Rad-Aid International Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Rad-Aid International Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s 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
    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 Rad-Aid International Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Rad-Aid International Inc 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 18 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.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $1.1M of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Rad-Aid International’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