Skip to content
We Work for Health at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

We Work for Health

WE WORK FOR HEALTH is a coalition focused on advancing public policies to improve health and well-being of patients.

$306k
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$93k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2024.

Health$444kScience & Tech$324kCommunity Improvement$99kEmployment$93kFood & Nutrition$90kEducation$10k
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $223,230, the rows itemized in this filing. The $306,230 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $83,000 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 · FY2024

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $50k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $173k
$80,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$1.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
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
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:

Its human-services grants (FY21–24, $110k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 91% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%CHILDREN'S SERVICES FOUNDATION: $20k → 12%HEMOPHILIA OF NORTH CAROLINA: $10k → 8%MEALS ON WHEELS NORTH CAROLINA: $80k → 15%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

WA
IL
OR
IN
OH
PA
CA
DE
AZ
NC
DC
GA
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
Bioflorida Inc

From concept to consumer, bioflorida is the premier source for supporting the florida life sciences industry. we provide comprehensive resources and advocacy, while fostering a thriving community that leads in innovation and groundbreaking…

—
2
Ohio Life Sciences Foundation

The mission of ohio life sciences foundation is to accelerate bioscience discovery, innovation and commercialization of global value, driving economic growth, company attraction, improving workforce training and improved quality of life in…

Health
3
Scbio

Scbio is a member organization that exists to support and advance the south carolina life sciences industry through collaboration, economic development initiaties, advocacy, workforce development, enhanced purchasing power and education.…

—
4
90-10instituteorg

create a new industry model to bring more affordable medicine to more people

—
5
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…

—
6
Targeting Resistance in Cancer Cooperative
Health
7
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
8
Bionj Inc

Bionj, inc. 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…

—
9
Medtech Innovator

Medtech innovator organizes and runs a global competition and virtual accelerator for medical device, digital health, and diagnostic startup companies.

Education
10
Arc Research Institute

Our mission is to accelerate scientific progress, understand the root causes of disease, and narrow the gap between discoveries and impact on patients.

Health
11
Casss

Casss sponsors international symposia for scientists in the biotechnology, pharmaceutical and academic arenas. furthermore, casss provides educational, employment, and networking opportunities for its current members.

—
12
North Carolina Biotechnology Center

The north carolina biotechnology center aids the biotechnology-related efforts of researchers, businesses, state and federal governments, and other agencies primarily through awards of grants and loans related to specific programs and…

Science & Tech
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Center for Global Health Innovation; the most unlike its peers is Childrens Services Foundation Dba Catalyst Center. 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

22 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. 22 of the 24 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
22/22
Grantees still filing
14/22
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BIOTECHNOLOGY INNOVATION ORGANIZATION: $250,000 · OtherBIOTECHNOLOGY INNOVATION ORGANIZATIONRX ABUSE LEADERSHIP INITIATIVE: $250,000 · OtherRX ABUSE LEADERSHIP INITIATIVEBAY AREA BIOSCIENCE CENTER DBA CALIFORNIA LIFE SCIENCES INSTITUTE: $30,000 · Other+6 more: $57,000 · Other+6 morePharmaceutical Industry Labor-Management Management Association: $93,230 · Community ImprovementPharmaceutical Industry La…Information Technology and Innovation Foundation: $90,000 · Community ImprovementInformation Technology and…DELAWARE BIOSCIENCE ASSOCIATION INC: $66,000 · Community ImprovementDELAWARE BIOSCIENCE ASSOCI…MEALS ON WHEELS NORTH CAROLINA: $80,000 · Human ServicesMEALS ON WH…CHILDRENS SERVICES FOUNDATION DBA CATALYST CENTER: $20,000 · Human ServicesCHILDRENS S…BLEEDING DISORDERS FOUNDATION OF NORTH CAROLINA: $10,000 · Human ServicesBLEEDING DI…AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY CANCER ACTION NETWORK INC: $33,000 · HealthAMERICAN …CYSTIC FIBROSIS FOUNDATION: $12,500 · HealthCYSTIC FI…COMMUNITY LIVER ALLIANCE: $12,000 · HealthCOMMUNITY…CENTER FOR HEALTHCARE INNOVATION: $10,000 · HealthCENTER FO…ADVOCATES FOR RESPONSIBLE CARE: $10,000 · HealthADVOCATES…DELAWARE BREAST CANCER COALITION INC: $9,000 · HealthDELAWARE …ARTHRITIS FOUNDATION INC: $6,500 · HealthARTHRITIS…TASTE OF THE SOUTH: $10,000 · PhilanthropyOPPORTUNITY THROUGH ENTREPRENEURSHIP FOUNDATION: $10,000 · Education
Other$587,000Community Improvement$249,230Human Services$110,000Health$93,000Philanthropy$10,000Education$10,000

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 budgetBIOTECHNOLOGY INNOVATION ORGANIZATION: $250,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetRX ABUSE LEADERSHIP INITIATIVE: $250,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetPharmaceutical Industry Labor-Management Management Association: $93,230 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetInformation Technology and Innovation Foundation: $90,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS NORTH CAROLINA: $80,000 over 1y, 63% of budgetDELAWARE BIOSCIENCE ASSOCIATION INC: $66,000 over 3y, 9.2% of budgetAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY CANCER ACTION NETWORK INC: $33,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetBAY AREA BIOSCIENCE CENTER DBA CALIFORNIA LIFE SCIENCES INSTITUTE: $30,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetCENTER FOR GLOBAL HEALTH INNOVATION: $15,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCYSTIC FIBROSIS FOUNDATION: $12,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY LIVER ALLIANCE: $12,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetCENTER FOR HEALTHCARE INNOVATION: $10,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetTASTE OF THE SOUTH: $10,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetADVOCATES FOR RESPONSIBLE CARE: $10,000 over 1y, 16% of budgetOPPORTUNITY THROUGH ENTREPRENEURSHIP FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetBLEEDING DISORDERS FOUNDATION OF NORTH CAROLINA: $10,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetDELAWARE BREAST CANCER COALITION INC: $9,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetIndiana Chamber of Commerce Inc: $8,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNORTH CAROLINA LIFE SCIENCES ORGANIZATION: $7,500 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetARTHRITIS FOUNDATION INC: $6,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLIFE SCIENCES PENNSYLVANIA: $6,000 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.

Pharmaceutical Resear…Biotechnology Innovat…American Online Givin…Amazonsmile Foundation
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of AmericaDC23× affinity9 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

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 We Work for Health funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from We Work for Health. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • Delaware Breast Cancer Coalition Inc: 7% of income from government
  • Delaware Bioscience Association Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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.
04Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to We Work for Health?

Find your warmest path to We Work for Health 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.

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 24 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on We Work for Health’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