Skip to content
The End Fund Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

The End Fund Inc

The END Fund's mission is to control and eliminate six neglected tropical diseases: river blindness, lymphatic filariasis, trachoma, schistosomiasis, intestinal worms, and visceral leishmaniasis.

$51M
Granted FY2024still arriving
6
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$3.2M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

International$55MHealth$12MArts & Culture$524kEducation$395kScience & Tech$24kPublic Benefit$6kOther$0
02FY2024 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 6 grants below total $9,513,483, the rows itemized in this filing. The $50,887,450 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $41,373,967 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

  • $50k–250k1 grant · $139k
  • $250k+5 grants · $9.4M
$2,182,879
Median grant
5
States reached
$39M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
The Carter Center Inc$3,173,117
United Front Against Riverblindness$2,345,882
Orbis International$2,182,879
Helen Keller International$885,410
IMA WORLD HEALTH$787,500
Akros Inc$138,695
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:

Its human-services grants (FY21–24, $2.9M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%IMA WORLD HEALTH: $881k → 14%IMA WORLD HEALTH: $788k → 14%IMA WORLD HEALTH: $758k → 14%IMA WORLD HEALTH: $430k → 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
MT
NY
MA
NJ
CA
NC
SC
DC
GA
FL

Grants abroad, by region: $41M on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 3 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Sub-Saharan Africa$41M · 98% · 42 grants

Stated purpose: NTDs

South Asia$405k · 1% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: NTDs

Middle East and North Africa$327k · 1% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: NTDs

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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$67M · 13 repeat orgs$724k to everyone else

13 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
10

Total granted

$67M
$724k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-3%
+89%

Still filing today

77%
80%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’19’20’21’22’23’24
InternationalHealthEducationScience & TechHuman ServicesArts & CultureOther
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

  • TC
    THE CARTER CENTER INC
    4× · 2019–2024 · $15M · revenue +27%
  • HK
    HELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL
    7× · 2017–2024 · $7.4M · revenue +44%
  • TF
    THE FRED HOLLOWS FOUNDATION
    2× · 2019–2020 · $796k · revenue ×25

Funded once

  • EU
    Emory Universitygraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $322k · revenue +32%
  • AG
    AMANI GLOBAL WORKS
    one grant, 2017 · $189k · revenue -4%
  • RW
    RADIO WORKSHOP US INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $50k · revenue +177%
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
Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation

Partners In Health (PIH) is a non-profit, global health organization that fights social injustice by bringing the benefits of modern medical science first and foremost to the most vulnerable communities worldwide. In Haiti, Malawi, Rwanda,…

Health
2
Management Sciences for Health Inc

(msh) saves lives and improves the health of the world's poorest (see schedule o) and most vulnerable people by closing the gap between knowledge and action in public health.

International
3
HDIInc

HDI`s mission is to advance world public health and human dignity, especially the health and socioeconomic situation of under-served populations which more others are significantly constrained by preventable, degrading disease.

International
4
Vision for Africa
Religion
5
Pathfinder International

Pathfinder expands access to sexual and reproductive health services, opening the door to opportunities for women and all individuals to thrive-economically, educationally, and civically. driven by our country-led leadership and local…

International
6
The Task Force for Global Health Inc

The mission of The Task Force for Global Health is to solve large-scale health problems affecting populations through three impact areas: health system strengthening, center for vaccine equity, and neglected tropical diseases. These impact…

Human Services
7
Global Health Solutions Inc

As a supporting organization, support the global health efforts of The Task Force for Global Health, Inc. by principally receiving donated phamaceuticals and coordinating the shipment to designated countries for the treatment of blinding…

Health
8
International Aids Vaccine Initiative Inc

A global nonprofit biomedical research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.

International
9
World Telehealth Initiative

World telehealth initiative provides sustainable medical expertise to the world's most vulnerable communities to build local capacity and advance core health services through a network of volunteer healthcare professionals supported by…

Health
10
Charity Global Inc

Charity: water is a non-profit organization bringing clean and safe water to people around the world. continued on schedule o.

Human Services
11
Muso Inc

Muso works to create a cure for delay because no one should die waiting for health care.

International
12
Intrahealth International Inc

Our mission is to improve the performance of health workers and strengthen the systems in which they work.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Family Health International Inc; the most unlike its peers is First Ladies Initiative. 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

18 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. 18 of the 23 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/18
Grantees still filing
11/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE CARTER CENTER INC: $14,544,055 · InternationalTHE CARTER CENTER INCPROJECT ORBIS INTERNATIONAL INC: $13,296,869 · InternationalPROJECT ORBIS INTERNATIONAL INCHELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL: $7,413,087 · InternationalHELEN KELLER INTERNATIONALCHRISTIAN BLIND MISSION INTERNAT'L INC: $7,189,708 · InternationalCHRISTIAN BLIND MISSION INTERNAT'L INCEVIDENCE ACTION: $6,507,346 · InternationalEVIDENCE ACTIONFamily Health International Inc: $1,801,097 · International+2 more: $205,219 · InternationalUnited Front Against Riverblindness: $10,646,434 · HealthUnited Front Agains…THE FRED HOLLOWS FOUNDATION: $796,076 · HealthTHE FRED HOLLOWS FO…+2 more: $199,396 · HealthINTERCHURCH MEDICAL ASSISTANCE INC: $2,856,022 · Human ServicesAkros Inc: $1,535,436 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL: $181,292 · OtherDIMAGI INC: $167,451 · Other+2 more: $26,000 · OtherEmory University: $322,262 · EducationLUMINOS FUND: $27,024 · EducationSHINING HOPE FOR COMMUNITIES INC: $25,795 · EducationRADIO WORKSHOP US INC: $50,000 · Arts & CultureResearch Triangle Institute: $23,950 · Science & Tech
International$50,957,381Health$11,641,906Human Services$2,856,022Other$1,910,179Education$375,081Arts & Culture$50,000Science & Tech$23,950

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 budgetTHE CARTER CENTER INC: $14,544,055 over 4y, 3.6% of budgetPROJECT ORBIS INTERNATIONAL INC: $13,296,869 over 6y, 4.8% of budgetHELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL: $7,413,087 over 7y, 1.6% of budgetCHRISTIAN BLIND MISSION INTERNAT'L INC: $7,189,708 over 3y, 37% of budgetEVIDENCE ACTION: $6,507,346 over 5y, 9.3% of budgetINTERCHURCH MEDICAL ASSISTANCE INC: $2,856,022 over 4y, 1.6% of budgetFamily Health International Inc: $1,801,097 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTHE FRED HOLLOWS FOUNDATION: $796,076 over 2y, 11% of budgetEmory University: $322,262 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKILIMANJARO CENTRE FOR COMMUNITY OPHTHALMOLOGY: $155,219 over 2y, 6.5% of budgetRADIO WORKSHOP US INC: $50,000 over 1y, 9.0% of budgetLUMINOS FUND: $27,024 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetSHINING HOPE FOR COMMUNITIES INC: $25,795 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetResearch Triangle Institute: $23,950 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLAST MILE HEALTH: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

Gates FoundationClinton Health Access…PathNetwork for GoodNational Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Gates FoundationWA19.1× affinity7 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Gates Foundation · Clinton Health Access Initiative Inc · Path · Network for Good · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 The End Fund Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The End Fund Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 76%
  • Interchurch Medical Assistance Inc: 76% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely 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 The End Fund Inc?

Find your warmest path to The End Fund 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 23 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 End’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