How much did TARA HEALTH FOUNDATION grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 53% of TARA HEALTH FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

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

2020

rapid responsedoula carecatalystlivable wageteleabortion studyemergencyeducation

2021

advancing paidpaid medicalmedical leavepregnancyemployee resourceresource groupsendowment

2022

board ruthconveningdesigningruth wowewowe buildingbuilding edgeedge movement

2023

board trainingansirh diversifydiversify investigatorsinvestigators createcreate inclusiveinclusive equitableequitable anti-racist

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

03FY2024 · 39 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k12 grants · $60k
$10k–50k13 grants · $279k
$50k–250k10 grants · $1.2M
$250k+4 grants · $5.8M

$25,000

Median grant

States reached

$34M

Total assets

Largest grants

MOVEMENT STRATEGY CENTER$2,050,000
HOPEWELL FUND$2,050,000
BUSINESS SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY$1,480,000
RHIA VENTURES$250,000
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION$200,000
THE LAVENDER FUND$200,000
COMMUNITY CATALYST$150,000
WE2GETHER CREATING CHANGE$125,000
MIDWEST ACCESS COALITION$100,000
SPRINGBOARD TO OPPORTUNITIES$100,000
THE KNIGHTS & ORCHIDS SOCIETY$100,000
NEO PHILANTHROPY$100,000
CARY CHRISTIAN CENTER$75,000
TEEN HEALTH MISSISSIPPI$50,000
AMALGAMATED FOUNDATION$46,500

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, $2.1M) land where the poverty rate runs at 24% — the area typically sits at 11%. 98% 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.

71%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$29M · 73 repeat orgs$12M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +200% since the first grant, against +111% for the ones you funded once.

73 repeat relationships — 27 still active in FY2024, 46 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

145

Total granted

$29M

$12M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+200%

+111%

Still filing today

63%

41%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $270k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

HealthHuman ServicesCivil RightsPhilanthropyEnvironmentCommunity ImprovementOther

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

MOVEMENT STRATEGY CENTER
5× · 2020–2024 · $4.8M · revenue +45%
HOPEWELL FUND
5× · 2020–2024 · $2.4M · revenue +59%
NEO PHILANTHROPY INC
5× · 2020–2024 · $1.5M · revenue +191%

Funded once

HF
HOPEWELL FUND
one grant, 2023 · $2.0M
RH
REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH INVESTORS ALLIANCE
one grant, 2020 · $1.0M · revenue -68% · 48% of their budget
UA
UCSF - ANSIRH UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO
one grant, 2021 · $466k

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.

Women's Reproductive Rights Assistance

WRRAP's mission is to ensure that individuals from all walks of life are afforded the equal opportunity to gain access to safe and legal abortion services.

Health

International Planned Parenthood Federation

Ippfwhr (dba fos feminista) aims to improve the quality of life of individuals by promoting for sexual and reproductive health and rights through advocacy and services.

International

Pregnancy Justice Inc

Pregnancy justice fights to protect pregnant people's rights by defending those who have been criminalized or who face other rights violations because of pregnancy, focusing on those most likely to be targeted for state control based on…

Civil Rights

Women Winning

We are changing the face of power by activating pro-choice campaign operatives, candidates, and elected officials who are committed to reproductive health, rights and justice, and working to protect the safety, dignity and bodily autonomy…

Public Benefit

Jobs with Justice San Francisco

A long-term, strategic alliance of labor, community, faith-based, and student organizations working together to build greater economic power for workers and community members through employee rights at work and access to good jobs,…

Employment

Women Donors Network

Women donors network is a multigenerational, multiracial feminist network that channels collective power and resources in solidarity with movements to protect and advance gender, racial, economic, and climate justice toward our vision of…

Philanthropy

The Birth Center

Provides gynecologic, pregnancy, & birth health care services, using a midwifery model of care

—

Cobalt Foundation

Cobalt actualizes policies, structures and attitudes that secure unassailable reproductive autonomy and abortion access.

Civil Rights

Reproductive Equity Now Inc

Reproductive equity now, inc. (the organization) works to make equitable access to the full spectrum of reproductive health care a reality for all people regardless of their race, ethnicity, income, zip code, gender, age, immigration…

—

Pro-Choice Washington

To protect and promote every persons right to access the full range of reproductive healthcare choices in Washington State, including safe and legal abortion, through education, advocacy, lobbying and coalition-building

—

Population Action International

Advances universal access to sexual & reproductive health & rights through advocacy & partnership

Health

Independent Women's Forum

Engage more individuals in the civic process, educate them about the impact of public policies on their lives and our economy, and build support for policies that empower individuals.

Civil Rights

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Community Catalyst Inc and the most unlike its peers is Indigenous Women Rising. 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 18 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) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/119

the rest of the field

11%

206,164/1,819,446

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

115 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)

110/115

Grantees still filing

92/115

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$22,498,697Community Improvement$4,847,760Health$4,252,000Philanthropy$2,882,235Civil Rights$2,271,000Human Services$2,182,700Public Benefit$1,700,500

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.

WK Kellogg FoundationMI43.5× affinity26 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: WK Kellogg Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Groundswell Fund · New Venture Fund · Hopewell Fund · Ms Foundation for Women Inc · Impactassetsinc · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · The Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation · The Grove Foundation · The Ford Foundation · The Robert Wood Johnson 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 TARA HEALTH 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

7get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%

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: NATIONAL ASSOCIATION TO ADVANCE BLACK BIRTH.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

low risk

6 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 3.0× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 911837139 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 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION TO ADVANCE BLACK BIRTH, 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

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 74% 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 Tara Health Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Tara Health 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.

TARA HEALTH 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?