Skip to content
Tobacco-Free Kids Action Fund at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Tobacco-Free Kids Action Fund

We passionately champion & advocate for evidence-based policies that protect children, improve health and save the most lives.

$12M
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
7
States reached
$467k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Health$7.2MCivil Rights$486kInternational$419k
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 12 grants below total $1,229,307, the rows itemized in this filing. The $12,431,549 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $11,202,242 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 · FY2025

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $103k
  • $50k–250k8 grants · $660k
  • $250k+1 grant · $467k
$62,500
Median grant
7
States reached
$76M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PARENTS AGAINST VAPING E-CIGARETTES$466,667
NATIONAL PTA$161,655
PAN AMERICAN HEALTH ORGANIZATIONWHO-PAHO$105,617
UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF$80,993
NATIONAL COUNCIL OF NEGRO WOMEN$75,000
NAACP ENOWERMENT PROGRAMS$62,500
NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR MEDICAL WELLBEING$62,500
NATIONAL LGBT CANCER NETWORK$56,250
ASSOCIATION OF STATE AND TERRITORIAL HEALTH OFFICIALS$55,000
JACK AND JILL OF AMERICA INC$37,500
100 BLACK MEN OF AMERICA INC$37,500
THE CENTER FOR BLACK HEALTH AND EQUITY$28,125
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 72% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%HEALTH RESOURCES IN ACTION: $299k → 16%AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF PENNSYLANIA INC: $166k → 22%SAN FRANCISCO VS BIG TOBACCO -BREATHE CALIFORNIA GOLDEN STATE: $1.3M → 10%COMMITTEE TO PROTECT CA KIDS CO OLSEN HAGEL: $804k → 12%UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $141k → 17%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $78k → 14%PAN AMERICAN HEALTH ORGANIZATIONWHO-PAHO: $106k → 14%NATIONAL LGBT CANCER NETWORK: $56k → 14%100 BLACK MEN OF AMERICA INC: $38k → 13%CAMPAIGN FOR A HEALTHY COLORADO (ONSITE PUBLIC AFFAIRS): $53k → 12%ASSOCIATION OF STATE AND TERRITORIAL HEALTH OFFICIALS: $55k → 7%NATIONAL PTA: $162k → 9%NAACP ENOWERMENT PROGRAMS: $63k → 19%HEALTH RESOURCES IN ACTION: $45k → 16%AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF PENNSYLANIA INC: $124k → 22%NO ON C SAN FRANCISCO VS BIG TOBACCO: $600k → 10%COMMITTEE TO PROTECT CA KIDS CO OLSEN HAGEL: $667k → 12%UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $81k → 17%JACK AND JILL OF AMERICA INC: $38k → 14%NATIONAL LGBT CANCER NETWORK: $31k → 14%ASSOCIATION OF STATE AND TERRITORIAL HEALTH OFFICIALS: $25k → 7%NATIONAL PTA: $83k → 9%AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF PENNSLYVANIA INC: $83k → 22%SAN FRANCISCO VS BIG TOBACCO: $650k → 12%UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $79k → 17%NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR MEDICAL WELLBEING: $63k → 14%THE CENTER FOR BLACK HEALTH AND EQUITY: $28k → 22%UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $12k → 17%NATIONAL COUNCIL OF NEGRO WOMEN: $75k → 14%THE CENTER FOR BLACK HEALTH AND EQUITY: $28k → 22%PARENTS AGAINST VAPING E-CIGARETTES: $467k → 17%PARENTS AGAINST VAPING E-CIGARETTES INC: $394k → 17%PARENTS AGAINST VAPING E-CIGARETTES INC: $351k → 17%PARENTS AGAINST VAPING E-CIGARETTES INC: $276k → 17%PARENTS AGAINST VAPING E-CIGARETTES INC: $233k → 17%PARENTS AGAINST VAPING E-CIGARETTES INC: $161k → 17%NAACP NEW YORK STATE CONFERENCE: $50k → 17%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

NY
MA
OR
PA
RI
CA
CO
VA
MD
NC
DC
GA
TX

Grants abroad, by region: $11M on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 8 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

East Asia and the Pacific$3.2M · 29% · 35 grants

Stated purpose: TOBACCO CONTROL GRANT · GLOBAL HEALTH GRANT

South America$2.9M · 26% · 25 grants

Stated purpose: TOBACCO CONTROL GRANT · GLOBAL HEALTH GRANT · TOBACCO CONTROLGRANT

Sub-Saharan Africa$2.2M · 20% · 15 grants

Stated purpose: GLOBAL HEALTH GRANT · GLOBL HEALTH GRANT

South Asia$1.6M · 14% · 28 grants

Stated purpose: TOBACCO CONTROL GRANT · GLOBAL HEALTH GRANT · GLOBAL HEALTHB GRANT

Central America and the Caribbean$700k · 6% · 9 grants

Stated purpose: GLOBAL HEALTH GRANT · TOBACCO CONTROL GRANT

Russia and Neighboring States$295k · 3% · 5 grants

Stated purpose: TOBACCO CONTROL GRANT

North America (Canada and Mexico)$258k · 2% · 3 grants

Stated purpose: TOBACCO CONTROL GRANT

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$52k · 0% · 3 grants

Stated purpose: TOBACCO CONTROL GRANT

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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$7.5M · 11 repeat orgs$549k to everyone else

11 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
3

Total granted

$7.5M
$231k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
+33%

Still filing today

91%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $318k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthCivil RightsInternationalEducationYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • PA
    Parents Against Vaping E-Cigarettes Action Fund Inc
    6× · 2020–2025 · $1.9M · revenue ×24 · 94% of their budget
  • AC
    AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES FOUNDATION OF PENNSYLVANIA INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $374k · revenue +36%
  • HEALTH RESOURCES IN ACTION INC
    2× · 2020–2021 · $344k · revenue +337%

Funded once

  • FH
    FLAVORS HOOK OREGON KIDS
    one grant, 2022 · $100k
  • AH
    American Heart Association Incgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $78k · revenue +33%
  • CF
    CAMPAIGN FOR A HEALTHY COLORADO (ONSITE PUBLIC AFFAIRS)
    one grant, 2017 · $53k
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
National Network of Public Health Institutes Inc

The national network of public health institutes, inc. (nnphi) is a national public health organization chartered on june 21, 2001. its mission is to support national public health system initiatives and strengthen public health institutes…

Health
2
American Lung Association

The american lung association's mission is to save lives by improving lung health and preventing lung disease. we do this through education, advocacy, and research.

Health
3
Researchamerica

2025 was a turbulent year for the medical and health research community, but our commitment to advocating for science never wavered. from pushing back against funding threats to elevating researchers' voices and equipping advocates, we…

—
4
United States Pharmacopeial Convention

Usp's mission is to improve global health through public standards and related programs that help ensure the quality, safety, and benefit of medicines and foods.

Health
5
Public Health Law Center Inc

Help community leaders use the power of law and policy to improve america's health.

Education
6
The Population Council Inc

We generate ideas, produce evidence, and design solutions to improve the lives of underserved populations around the world. we take a multidisciplinary, intergenerational, life-cycle approach that contributes to (see schedule o)four global…

International
7
Hispanic Health Coalition of Georgi

The hispanic health coalition of georgia (hhcga) is a 32+ year old 501 (c)3), which continues to serve the minority, underserved, and socio- economically challenged populations within the hispanic/latino, and hispanic/latino black members…

Health
8
National Association of Nurse Practitioners in Women's Health

Npwh is the professional community for women's health nurse practitioners and other advanced practice registered nurses who provide women's and gender-related healthcare. we set a standard of excellence by generating, translating, and…

Health
9
Preventing Tobacco Addiction
Health
10
National Vaccine Information Center

The purpose of nvic is to promote and encourage the health and welfare of american children and adults through its research and education-oriented programs to prevent vaccine injuries and deaths and to assist individuals (both children and…

—
11
National Health Council Inc

To provide a united voice for people with chronic diseases and disabilities.

—
12
American Urological Association Inc

Mission: promote the highest standards of urological clinical care through education, research, and the formulation of health care policy.vision: to be the premier professional association for the advancement of professional urologic…

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Naacp Empowerment Programs Inc; the most unlike its peers is National Council of Negro Women Inc. 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

15 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. 15 of the 19 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
5/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COMMITTEE TO PROTECT CALIFORNIA KIDS: $2,549,984 · OtherCOMMITTEE TO PROTECT CALIFORNIA KIDSCOMMITTEE TO PROTECT CA KIDS CO OLSEN HAGEL: $1,470,971 · OtherCOMMITTEE TO PROTECT CA KIDS CO OLSEN HAGELHEALTH RESOURCES IN ACTION INC: $343,932 · OtherHEALTH RESOURCES IN ACTION INC+4 more: $295,617 · Other+4 moreParents Against Vaping E-Cigarettes Action Fund Inc: $1,881,953 · HealthParents Against Vaping E-Cigare…NATIONAL LGBT CANCER NETWORK INC: $87,500 · HealthASSOCIATION OF STATE AND TERRITORIAL HEALTH OFFICIALS: $80,000 · HealthAmerican Heart Association Inc: $78,000 · Health+2 more: $118,750 · HealthAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES FOUNDATION OF PENNSYLVANIA INC: $373,802 · Civil RightsNAACP EMPOWERMENT PROGRAMS INC: $112,500 · Civil RightsUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $313,163 · InternationalNational Council of Negro Women Inc: $75,000 · InternationalNational Congress of Parents & Teachers: $244,990 · Education100 BLACK MEN OF AMERICA INC: $37,500 · Youth Development
Other$4,660,504Health$2,246,203Civil Rights$486,302International$388,163Education$244,990Youth Development$37,500

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCOMMITTEE TO PROTECT CALIFORNIA KIDS: $2,549,984 over 3y, 33% of budgetParents Against Vaping E-Cigarettes Action Fund Inc: $1,881,953 over 6y, 94% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES FOUNDATION OF PENNSYLVANIA INC: $373,802 over 3y, 3.5% of budgetHEALTH RESOURCES IN ACTION INC: $343,932 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $313,163 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetNational Congress of Parents & Teachers: $244,990 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetNAACP EMPOWERMENT PROGRAMS INC: $112,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL LGBT CANCER NETWORK INC: $87,500 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetASSOCIATION OF STATE AND TERRITORIAL HEALTH OFFICIALS: $80,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $78,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNational Council of Negro Women Inc: $75,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetNATIONAL COUNCIL FOR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH: $62,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetThe Center for Black Health and Equity: $56,250 over 2y, 0.2% of budget100 BLACK MEN OF AMERICA INC: $37,500 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetJACK & JILL OF AMERICA INC: $37,500 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

Campaign for Tobacco-…The Robert Wood Johns…Network for GoodAmerican Online Givin…Amazonsmile Foundation
Campaign for Tobacco-Free KidsDC22.1× affinity8 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids · The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation · Network for Good · American Online Giving 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 Tobacco-Free Kids Action Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Tobacco-Free Kids Action Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 39%
  • Health Resources in Action Inc: 39% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
3report 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.

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 19 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Tobacco-Free Kids Action’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