How much did WE WORK FOR HEALTH grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 55% of WE WORK FOR HEALTH’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2021

advocacyeducation

2022

curediseasestatesscienceseducationalacspolicy

2023

cancer

2024

healthcare

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

$10k–50k2 grants · $50k
$50k–250k2 grants · $173k

$80,000

Median grant

States reached

$1.6M

Total assets

Largest grants

PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY LABOR-MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION$93,230
MEALS ON WHEELS NORTH CAROLINA$80,000
CALIFORNIA LIFE SCIENCE INSTITUTE$30,000
CHILDREN'S SERVICES FOUNDATION$20,000

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY21–24, $110k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14% — the area typically sits at 9%. 91% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your field

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.

Ohio Life Sciences Association

Align the life sciences ecosystem in the state of ohio, building collaborative partnerships, and advocating for policies and funding that will help to accelerate life science priorities and drive sustainable economic growth.

Community Improvement

Bioflorida Inc

Bioflorida is the voice of florida's life sciences industry, representing 8,600 establishments and research organizations in the biopharmaceutical, medical technology, and digital health sectors that collectively employ 107,000 floridians.

—

California Life Sciences Association

Advance ca life sciences ecosystem by advocating public policies & supporting businesses.

Community Improvement

Arc Research Institute

Our mission is to accelerate scientific progress and understand the root causes of complex diseases. This challenge requires researchers across many disciplines to study fundamental biological mechanisms, develop new technologies, and…

Health

Asco Association

Our mission is to conquer cancer through advocacy for research, education, and the promotion of the highest quality, equitable patient care.

Community Improvement

Casss

Casss brings together professionals from industry, academia, & regulatory agencies to solve scientific & technical problems to advance the field of biopharmaceutical development.

—

Massachusetts Biotechnology Council Inc

Massbio is committed to advancing massachusetts' leadership in the life sciences to grow the industry, add value to the health care system and improve patient lives.

—

Bionj Inc

Bionj is a powerful network of 400 member companies representing research-based life sciences companies and stakeholders. because patients can't wait, we are dedicated to propelling the rich innovation ecosystem in the new jersey region to…

—

Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences

Philanthropy

Bionorthtexas Foundation

The BIONORTHTEXAS Foundation (BioNTX) is a Texas Membership Association designed to support company formation and industry growth in the bioscience sector. The organization spans 26 counties in North Texas and is committed to collaboration…

Health

International Life Sciences Institute

Ilsi is a global, nonprofit federation dedicated to generating and advancing emerging science and groundbreaking research to ensure foods are safe, nutritious and sustainable, and that they improve planetary and human health and well-being…

Science & Tech

Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology

The foundation raises funds to help the alliance for clinical trials in oncology answer important treatment questions through large-scale clinical trials.

Health

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Center for Global Health Innovation and the most unlike its peers is Cystic Fibrosis Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 25 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 10% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/24

the rest of the field

10%

1,356/12,977

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.

05the grantee network

22 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

22/22

Grantees still filing

16/22

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$587,000Community Improvement$249,230Human Services$110,000Health$93,000Philanthropy$10,000Education$10,000

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.

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.

Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of AmericaDC33.5× affinity14 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America · Biotechnology Innovation Organization · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 organisation WE WORK FOR HEALTH 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

1get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

04Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: MEALS ON WHEELS NORTH CAROLINA.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

medium risk

4 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 833370195 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on MEALS ON WHEELS NORTH CAROLINA, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
WatchSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue contracted over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 63% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to We Work for Health?

Find your warmest path to We Work for Health through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

WE WORK FOR HEALTH

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

22 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to We Work for Health?

More from the funding graph

WE WORK FOR HEALTH

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

22 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to We Work for Health?

More from the funding graph