Skip to content
Utah Health Information Network Inc at a glance

· Public charity

Utah Health Information Network Inc

Utah health information network (uhin) reduces healthcare costs and improves quality and access for the community by assuring that providers, payers, and patients can exchange information electronically.

$1.7M
Granted FY2017
23
Grants FY2017
6
States reached
$553k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01FY2017 · 23 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2017

  • Under $10k3 grants · $24k
  • $10k–50k13 grants · $250k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $659k
  • $250k+2 grants · $804k
$19,532
Median grant
6
States reached
$21M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNIVERSITY OF UTAH GRANTS & CONTRAC$552,644
IHC HEALTH SERVICES INC$250,865
UTAH DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH$231,554
HEALTH INSIGHT$218,483
ESO SOLUTIONSINC$90,000
IDAHO HEALTH DATA EXCHANGE$64,428
NEHII INC$54,550
CENTRAL VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER$31,985
KANE COUNTY HOSPITAL$31,985
GRANGER CLINIC$27,500
HEALTHIE NEVADA$20,110
IDAHO HEALTH DATA EXCHANGE$19,532
TANNER CLINIC$18,000
WASATCH PEAK FAMILY PRACTICE$16,750
BEAVER VALLEY HOSPITAL$15,750
02The need
02

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 (FY17–17) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 14% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%NEHII INC: $55k → 12%MICHAEL KRAMER: $15k → 10%TANNER CLINIC: $18k → 6%CENTRAL VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER: $32k → 8%UNIVERSITY OF UTAH GRANTS & CONTRAC: $553k → 8%PREMIER FAMILY MEDICAL: $10k → 8%KANE COUNTY HOSPITAL: $32k → 9%MILFORD HOSPITAL: $13k → 10%MOAB VALLEY HEALTHCARE INC: $10k → 11%HEALTHIE NEVADA: $20k → 13%WASATCH PEAK FAMILY PRACTICE: $17k → 6%HEALTH INSIGHT: $218k → 8%PROVO ALLERGY & ASTHMA CLINIC: $5k → 8%BEAVER VALLEY HOSPITAL: $16k → 10%EXODUS HEALTHCARE NETWORK PLLC 1: $9k → 8%MEDUSA: $15k → 8%PLANNED PARENTHOOD ASSOCIATION OF U: $16k → 8%UTAH DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH: $232k → 8%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.
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.
03Its 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
Rural Idaho & Mountain West Primary Care
Health
2
Teton Valley Health Care

To encourage and support a healthier community.

Health
3
Regional West Health Services

Health care services for the people of western nebraska and eastern wyoming.

Health
4
Renown Health

Renown Health makes a genuine difference in the health and well-being of the people and communities we serve.

Health
5
Cumberland Medical Center

Cumberland Medical Center provides quality healthcare, in alignment with Covenant Health's mission to serve the community by improving the quality of life through better health, regardless of the patient's ability to pay.

Health
6
HealthInfoNet
Public Benefit
7
Mountain Valleys Health Centers

We serve our rural communities with complete quality care and friendly customer service, providing exceptional healthcare for all.

—
8
Utah Navajo Health System Inc

To improve quality of life through comprehensive, self-empowered, culturally-sensitive healthcare and amazing customer service.

Health
9
OroHealth Corporation

To support Oroville Hospital in it's ongoing mission and to ensure the Oroville Community has access to comprehensive health care services now and in the future.

—
10
Clearwater Valley Hospital and Clinics Inc

We improve healthcare one patient at a time in a friendly and professional culture committed to superior quality and safety.

Health
11
Nevada Health Centers Inc

NVHC provides health services throughout the State of Nevada. Health services include OB/GYN, Pediatrics, Internal Medicine, Primary medical, Behavioral Health and dental care services. NVHC operates a mobile mammography clinic, two mobile…

Health
12
Roane County Medical Center

Roane County Medical Center provides quality healthcare, in alignment with Covenant Health's mission to serve the community by improving the quality of life through better health, regardless of a patient's ability to pay.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Healthinsight Management Corp; the most unlike its peers is Central Valley Medical Center. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

8 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. 8 of the 22 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
7/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNIVERSITY OF UTAH: $552,644 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF UTAHSTATE OF UTAH GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: $231,554 · OtherSTATE OF UTAH GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTHEALTHINSIGHT MANAGEMENT CORP: $218,483 · OtherHEALTHINSIGHT MANAGEMENT CORPESO SOLUTIONSINC: $90,000 · OtherESO SOLUTIONSINC+11 more: $177,335 · Other+11 moreIHC HEALTH SERVICES INC: $250,865 · HealthIHC HEALTH SERVICES INCIdaho Health Data Exchange Inc: $83,960 · HealthIdaho Health Data Exchange…Central Valley Medical Center: $31,985 · HealthCentral Valley Medical Cen…HEALTHIE NEVADA: $20,110 · HealthPLANNED PARENTHOOD ASSOCIATION OF UTAH: $15,575 · Health+1 more: $9,550 · HealthNEBRASKA HEALTH INFORMATION INITIATIVE INC: $54,550 · Public Benefit
Other$1,270,016Health$412,045Public Benefit$54,550

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 budgetIHC HEALTH SERVICES INC: $250,865 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHEALTHINSIGHT MANAGEMENT CORP: $218,483 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetIdaho Health Data Exchange Inc: $83,960 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetNEBRASKA HEALTH INFORMATION INITIATIVE INC: $54,550 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetCentral Valley Medical Center: $31,985 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHEALTHIE NEVADA: $20,110 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD ASSOCIATION OF UTAH: $15,575 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMOAB VALLEY HEALTHCARE INC: $9,550 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds IHC HEALTH SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds HEALTHINSIGHT MANAGEMENT CORP ↗
  • Who funds Idaho Health Data Exchange Inc ↗
  • Who funds NEBRASKA HEALTH INFORMATION INITIATIVE INC ↗
  • Who funds Central Valley Medical Center ↗
  • Who funds HEALTHIE NEVADA ↗
  • Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD ASSOCIATION OF UTAH ↗
  • Who funds MOAB VALLEY HEALTHCARE INC ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Utah Health Information Network Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Utah Health Information Network Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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 22 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 2017, released 2017. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2017, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Utah Health Information Network’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