· Public charity
Vose River Charitable Fund
VOSE RIVER CHARITABLE FUND (vrcf) promotes public health in the united states by developing tools and collaborations with other nonprofits and government health departments to promote effective policies and to support the public health workforce.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2021–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k1 grant · $8k
- $10k–50k16 grants · $349k
- $50k–250k18 grants · $2.4M
- $250k+11 grants · $4.0M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| POISE FOUNDATION | $520,000 |
| METEORITE LLC | $506,000 |
| METEORITE LLC | $506,000 |
| FUND FOR EDUCATIONAL EXCELLENCE INC | $450,000 |
| AMERICAN INDIAN ASSOC OF TUCSON INC | $350,000 |
| THE PUBLIC GOODS PROJECTS INC | $310,000 |
| HEALTH RESOURCES IN ACTION INC | $299,500 |
| CHANGELAB SOLUTIONS | $292,500 |
| PRESIDENT AND FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE DBA HARVARD TH CHAN SCHOOL OF PU | $284,000 |
| COALITION OF COMMUNITIES OF COLOR | $280,000 |
| TASK FORCE FOR GLOBAL HEALTHPUBLIC HEALTH INFORMATICS INSTITUTE | $250,000 |
| EQUAL MEASURE | $225,000 |
| TASK FORCE FOR GLOBAL HEALTHPUBLIC HEALTH INFORMATICS INSTITUTE | $204,000 |
| TEMPLE UNIVERSITY | $200,000 |
| HEALTH RESOURCES IN ACTION INC | $197,500 |
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, $1.2M) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 10% of Vose River Charitable Fund’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +23% since the first grant, against +8% for the ones you funded once.
24 repeat relationships — 21 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 12 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; $492k 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
- AIAmerican Indian Association of Tucson Inc2× · 2023–2024 · $1.3M · revenue +89%
FUND FOR EDUCATIONAL EXCELLENCE INC2× · 2023–2024 · $1.1M · revenue +37%- TTTHE TASK FORCE FOR GLOBAL HEALTH INC3× · 2022–2024 · $924k · revenue +10%
Funded once
- DUDREXEL UNIVERSITYone grant, 2022 · $299k · revenue +8%
- BCBIG CITIES HEALTH COALITION INCone grant, 2022 · $289k · revenue +12%
DE BEAUMONT FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2023 · $253k · revenue -337%
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 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…
Public health institute generates and promotes research, leadership and partnerships to build capacity for strong public health policy, programs, systems and practices.
CommonHealth ACTION develops people and organizations to produce health through equitable policies, programs, and practices.
Assist banner health complete its mission to make health care easier so life can be better by providing integrated & coordinated care & population health management.
Altarum is focused on improving the health of individuals with fewer financial resources and populations disenfranchised by the health care system. we drive impactful changes in four domains: 1) transform health service delivery - we work…
Primary functions are the coordination and delivery of health care resources and services, health care education for the hospital service area, long range analysis of health care needs and development of programs, and arranging for…
Help community leaders use the power of law and policy to improve america's health.
Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…
We educate the next generation of leaders to improve the health of our society.
See schedule oto serve the public by:- assuring the qualifications of health care professionals- providing primary-source verification of credentials of health careprofessionals, as they serve throughout the world- supporting international…
To equip partners and communities in colorado and across the nation with the resources, services and unbiased data needed to improve health and health care. we help communities, organizations and individuals identify opportunities to…
The national nurse-led care consortium (nncc) strives to advance nurse-led healthcare through policy, consultation, and programs to reduce health disparities and meet people's primary care and wellness needs.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Equal Measure and the most unlike its peers is Fannie E Rippel Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 30 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
60 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. 60 of the 75 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 American Indian Association of Tucson Inc ↗
- Who funds FUND FOR EDUCATIONAL EXCELLENCE INC ↗
- Who funds POISE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE TASK FORCE FOR GLOBAL HEALTH INC ↗
- Who funds COALITION OF COMMUNITIES OF COLOR ↗
- Who funds ChangeLab Solutions ↗
- Who funds THE PUBLIC GOOD PROJECTS INC ↗
- Who funds HEALTH RESOURCES IN ACTION INC ↗
- Who funds Temple University - Of The Commonwealth System of Higher Education ↗
- Who funds EQUAL MEASURE ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗
- Who funds THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds CAMPAIGN FOR TOBACCO-FREE KIDS ↗
- Who funds SMART GROWTH AMERICA ↗
- Who funds DREXEL UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds BIG CITIES HEALTH COALITION INC ↗
- Who funds DE BEAUMONT FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds PUBLIC JUSTICE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds American Nonsmokers Rights Foundation ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR SCIENCE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST ↗
- Who funds Center for Environmental Health ↗
- Who funds CASA DE SALUD ↗
- Who funds THE HUNGER AND HEALTH COALITION INC ↗
- Who funds DURHAM PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE COMMUNITY BUILDERS INC ↗
- Who funds TIDES CENTER ↗
- Who funds NAMI GREATER SAN ANTONIO ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR MULTICUTURAL HEALTH ↗
- Who funds SAN DIEGO HEALTHCARE QUALITY COLLABORATIVE ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY SERVICES FOR CHILDREN INC ↗
- Who funds ACCESS HEALTH ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH WATCH ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARTNERSHIP FOR WOMEN AND FAMILIES ↗
- Who funds Reinvent South Stockton Coalition ↗
- Who funds WESTERN IDAHO COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP 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: The Kresge Foundation · The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation · De Beaumont Foundation Inc · WK Kellogg Foundation · National Foundation for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Inc · Kaiser Foundation Health Plan Inc · New Venture Fund · East Bay Community Foundation · NEO Philanthropy Inc · Gates Foundation · Tides Foundation · The Ford 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 Vose River Charitable Fund 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.
- Big Cities Health Coalition Inc — 100% of income from government
- Health Resources in Action Inc — 39% of income from government
- Coalition of Communities of Color — 15% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston University — 12% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- Public Justice Center Inc — 5% of income from government
- The Community Builders Inc — 4% of income from government
- Fund for Educational Excellence Inc — 1% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 0% 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Vose River Charitable Fund?
Find your warmest path to Vose River Charitable Fund 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.