How much did RX FOUNDATION grant in FY2024?

Health$3.2MCivil Rights$1.9MCommunity Improvement$1.7MPhilanthropy$961kPublic Benefit$750kCrime & Legal$350kEducation$303kEmployment$300kHuman Services$267kOther$6.3M

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2019

titledstakeholdersendnon-profit developingdeveloping long-termlong-term communicationspolicy

2020

covid responseadvocacy innovationbuilding healthdesignhealth advocacyruralcare

2021

equity accesscovid vaccinevaccine equitybluebuild practicepractice covidcovid case

2022

likevideomental healthhostingchurchesfood distributionrecovery

2023

aheadbuild sustainsustain healthhealth resiliencygotancient songsong doula

2024

further exemptexempt healthresearch

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 33 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

$10k–50k10 grants · $250k
$50k–250k23 grants · $2.7M

$100,000

Median grant

States reached

$57M

Total assets

Largest grants

ARAB COMMUNITY CENTER FOR ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL SERVICES$150,000
MISSOURI ORGANIZING AND VOTER ENGAGEMENT COLLABORATIVE$150,000
A HEALTHIER DEMOCRACY INC$150,000
IN OUR OWN VOICE NATIONAL BLACK WOMEN'S REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE AGENDA$150,000
ORGANIZING EMPOWERMENT FUND$150,000
THE OHIO ORGANIZING COLLABORATIVE$150,000
SEA CHANGE RECOVERY COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION INC$150,000
MHM SUPPORT SERVICES$150,000
COMMON COUNSEL FOUNDATION$150,000
MISSOURI JOBS WITH JUSTICE$150,000
UNITED VISION FOR IDAHO INC$150,000
MISSOURI ORGANIZING AND VOTER ENGAGEMENT COLLABORATIVE$115,000
FAITH IN FLORIDA INC$100,000
TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND$100,000
ARIZONA CENTER FOR EMPOWERMENT$100,000

02The need

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY20–24, $192k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16% — the area typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge

repeat funding

Who you back again

Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.

75%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$12M · 49 repeat orgs$4.0M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +132% since the first grant, against +122% for the ones you funded once.

49 repeat relationships — 21 still active in FY2024, 28 since wound down; 11 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$12M

$2.9M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+132%

+122%

Still filing today

69%

57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 63% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.1M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

HealthCommunity ImprovementCivil RightsHuman ServicesPhilanthropyEducationOther

First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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

MO
MISSOURI ORGANIZING AND VOTER ENGAGEMENT COLLABORATIVE
5× · 2019–2024 · $865k · revenue +759%
THE NEW YORK COMMUNITY TRUST
3× · 2020–2023 · $706k · revenue +28%
AA
ALABAMA ARISE
4× · 2020–2024 · $600k · revenue +65%

Funded once

BV
BOSTON VA RESEARCH INSTITUTE
one grant, 2019 · $220k · revenue +4%
HU
HARVARD UNIVERSITYARIADNE LABS
one grant, 2019 · $197k
GD
GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT INCUBATOR INCgraduated
one grant, 2019 · $150k · revenue +240%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

HealthImpact

To shape health care through workforce strategy, stakeholder convening, and policy advocacy.

Health

Dartmouth-Hitchcock Clinic

Advancing health through research, education, clinical practice, and community partnerships; providing each person the best care in the right place, at the right time, every time.

Health

One Community Health

To advance health and social justice for all members of our community.

—

National Coalition On Health Care

The mission of the national coalition on health care (nchc) is to support research and analysis, develop and promote policy solutions, build consensus, and engage the public in order to ensure that america has a high quality health system…

Health

Neighborhealth Corporation

Neighborhealth's mission is to promote and sustain healthy communities, families, and individuals by providing accessible, person-centered, and compassionate, high-quality health care services to all who live and work in our service area,…

Health

Arbor Research Collaborative for

To improve patient care through research that shapes medical policies and practice.

Health

Commonhealth Action

CommonHealth ACTION develops people and organizations to produce health through equitable policies, programs, and practices.

Health

Institute for Public Health Innovation

Iphi develops multi-sector partnerships and innovative solutions to improve the public's health and well-being across maryland, virginia and the district of columbia. our work strengthens health systems and policy, enhances conditions that…

Human Services

Massachusetts Public Health Association

The massachusetts public health association (mpha) is the champion for public health in the commonwealth. we are a catalyst for change, eliminating health inequities and promoting healthy communities for all.

Health

Executives for Health Innovation Ehi

Executives for health innovation (ehi) is a catalyst for healthcare transformation, convening diverse leaders from across the industryto unlock opportunities for collaborative innovation. ehi focuses on education, shaping policy, and…

—

Hawaii Health Information Exchange

Hawai'i health information exchange is the state's designated entity for health data exchange. we provide the technology, technical expertise, and governance that enables health care providers and stakeholders to share and access complete…

Public Benefit

Legal Council for Health Justice

Use the power of law to secure dignity, opportunity & well-being for people w/illness & disability.

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Community Catalyst Inc and the most unlike its peers is The Feinstein Institutes for. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 25 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

1%1/68

the rest of the field

11%

206,163/1,819,497

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

05the grantee network

65 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

64/65

Grantees still filing

57/65

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$7,146,608Health$3,165,792Civil Rights$1,893,200Community Improvement$1,726,000Philanthropy$960,656Public Benefit$750,000Crime & Legal$350,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them

A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

New Venture FundDC31.9× affinity17 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: New Venture Fund · Community Catalyst Inc · The Ford Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Wellspring Philanthropic Fund Inc · Windward Fund · Proteus Fund Inc · WK Kellogg Foundation · The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation · Tides Foundation · NEO Philanthropy Inc · The Rockefeller Foundation

Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organisation RX FOUNDATION funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

6get no government money at all

2rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. An association, not a claim that your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: DOCTORS FOR AMERICA.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

medium risk

~6 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 8 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

8 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 2.3× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 454005553 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on DOCTORS FOR AMERICA, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

WatchFinancial stability— Roughly 6 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 59% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Rx Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Rx Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

RX FOUNDATION

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

65 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Rx Foundation?

More from the funding graph

RX FOUNDATION

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

65 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Rx Foundation?

More from the funding graph