· Public charity
The Foundation for Excellence in Mental Health Care Inc
We connect the passion of private philanthropy with the wolrd's top researchers and programs to bring recovery-based care and supports to every community.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 4 grants below total $696,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $756,000 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $60,000 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k2 grants · $55k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $75k
- $250k+1 grant · $566k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| HOPEWORX INC | $566,000 |
| MAD IN AMERICA FOUNDATION | $75,000 |
| THE INSTITUTE FOR THE DEVLOPMENT OF HUMAN ARTS | $45,000 |
| ROADS TO FREEDOM | $10,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $263k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
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 — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +34% since the first grant, against +27% for the ones you funded once.
11 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $55k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- HIHOPEWORX INC3× · 2022–2024 · $933k · revenue +34%
- MIMAD IN AMERICA FOUNDATION4× · 2019–2024 · $490k · revenue +3% · 49% of their budget
- EUEmory University3× · 2017–2019 · $452k · revenue +80%
Funded once
- WMWOMEN MAKE MOVIES INCgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $100k · revenue +82%
- RFRESEARCH FOUNDATION FOR MENTAL HYGIENE INCgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $100k · revenue +70%
- ROREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT SAN DIEGOone grant, 2017 · $93k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
The institute of contemporary psychoanalysis was formed in 1990 to offer mental health professionals, as well as scholars and professionals from other fields, the opportunity to study the full scope of psychoanalytic theory and clinical…
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
The mission of the Nonduality Institute is to advance scientific understanding of nonduality through conducting research into neural signatures of nondual awareness and its effects on cognitive, affective and perceptual…
The mission of the institute is to translate basic genetic and molecular mechanisms of schizophrenia and related developmental brain disorders into clinical advances that change the lives of affected individuals. it is catalyzing a new…
To carry out and support basic research related to Obsessive Compulsive Disorder OCD and Depression.
Organization's mission: boston university is an international, comprehensive, private research university, committed to educating students to be reflective, resourceful individuals ready to live, adapt, and lead in an interconnected world.…
The hugo w. moser research institute at kennedy krieger, inc. (the "research institute") is an internationally recognized research facility finding answers to problems and injuries that affect a child's developing brain. researchers have…
The mission of the us phychiatric rehabilitation foundation is to grow and train the recovery workforce in the united states and around the globe while promoting mental and behavioral health wellness and recovery. to provide access,…
Supported education and research training for mental health.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Western Massachusetts Training Consortium Inc and the most unlike its peers is Eastern Maine Medical Center Northern Light Eastern Maine Medical Cen. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
19 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 19 of the 22 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
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.
- Who funds HOPEWORX INC ↗
- Who funds MAD IN AMERICA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Emory University ↗
- Who funds WESTERN MASSACHUSETTS TRAINING CONSORTIUM INC ↗
- Who funds Eastern Maine Medical Center Northern Light Eastern Maine Medical Cen ↗
- Who funds OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF MOUNT HOLYOKE COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds WOMEN MAKE MOVIES INC ↗
- Who funds RESEARCH FOUNDATION FOR MENTAL HYGIENE INC ↗
- Who funds BEAUTIFUL MINDS WELLNESS ↗
- Who funds MINDFREEDOM INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds FJC ↗
- Who funds USF RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE HUMAN ARTS INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL EMPOWERMENT CENTERINC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF CANTERBURY FOUNDATION IN AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds THE ROCKVILLE INSTITUTE A RESEARCH INST FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SOCIAL SCIENCE ↗
- Who funds FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ROADS TO FREEDOM ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Johns Hopkins University · National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 organization The Foundation for Excellence in Mental Health Care Inc 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.
- National Empowerment Centerinc — 62% of income from government
- The Trustees of Mount Holyoke College — 1% of income from government
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 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.