· Public charity
UMANA Foundation
To foster improvement in health care of ukrainians worldwide and to promote healthcare research, education and knowledge.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 5 grants below total $173,250 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $328,369 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $155,119 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
- Under $10k2 grants · $12k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $16k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $146k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UMANA (Chapters) | $88,400 |
| Ukrainian Congress Committee of America (UCCA) | $57,600 |
| World Federation of Ukrainian Medical Assocition W | $15,500 |
| SIFH Global | $6,500 |
| Kyiv Mohyla Foundation | $5,250 |
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 (FY22–24, $37k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 0% since the first grant, against -16% for the ones you funded once.
5 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 1 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, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7k 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
- UMUkrainian Medical Association of North America3× · 2022–2024 · $1.6M · revenue +376% · 42% of their budget
- WFWORLD FEDERATION OF UKRAINIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION3× · 2022–2024 · $140k
- UCUKRAINIAN CONGRESS COMMITTEE OF AMERICA3× · 2022–2024 · $115k · revenue -75%
Funded once
- MIMedGlobal Incgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $40k · revenue +166%
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2022 · $37k
- EGEMBRACE GLOBALgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $35k · revenue +74%
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.
To help create a free, independent, and democratic Ukraine where Ukrainians and people of other nationalities will have the right to freely associate and express their will in an open civil society free from corruption.
In 2006, Ukrainian Foundation was established by the immigrants from Ukraine to help the Ukrainian refugees adjust to their new home in the United States. Our base is in Portland, OR, a home to over 100,000 immigrants from Ukraine. With…
Providing services to Ukrainian Citizens
To provide humanitarian aid to the people of Ukraine in the provision of medical equipment and supplies reconstruction equipment and protective gear. We ship in-kind donated goods and make select purchases of goods.
Providing humanitarian relief to individuals and groups afflicted in Ukraine.
Provide humanitarian supoort to the people of Ukraine
Providing targeted humanitarian aid to individuals and communities in war-torn Ukraine. Delivery of vital resources such as medical equipment first aid kits and direct humanitarian aid. We are providing medical supplies to hospita ls field…
Support ukraine
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ukrainian Congress Committee of America and the most unlike its peers is Face the Future Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
18 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. 18 of the 21 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 Ukrainian Medical Association of North America ↗
- Who funds UKRAINIAN CONGRESS COMMITTEE OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds MedGlobal Inc ↗
- Who funds EMBRACE GLOBAL ↗
- Who funds FUND TO AID UKRAINE INC ↗
- Who funds Leodoc Foundation ↗
- Who funds Global Medical Knowledge Alliance Inc ↗
- Who funds LELEKA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds KYIV MOHYLA FOUNDATION OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds Face the Future Foundation ↗
- Who funds PROTEZ FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Revived Soldiers Ukraine ↗
- Who funds UKRAINIAN INSTITUTE OF MODERN ART ↗
- Who funds RAZOM INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN UKRAINIAN MEDICAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Ukrainian Catholic University Foundation ↗
- Who funds Charity Navigator ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF BE AN ANGEL INC ↗
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: Ukrainian American Community (Uac) Foundation Inc · The Heritage Foundation of First Security Federal Savings Bank Inc · The Selfreliance Foundation · The Maria Hulai Lion Foundation Inc · Charles Stewart Mott Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Charities Aid Foundation America · Network for Good
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 UMANA 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to UMANA Foundation?
Find your warmest path to UMANA Foundation 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.