Loading…
Loading…
Delaware · Nonprofit
DELAWARE BIOSCIENCE ASSOCIATION INC (Delaware) is funded by 4 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $145,000 in grants to it, the largest being WE WORK FOR HEALTH ($66,000). 3 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
DELAWARE BIOSCIENCE ASSOCIATION INC holds deeper cash reserves than three-quarters of the 11,157 community improvement nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 11,157 community improvement nonprofits $100k–$1M, FY2024
Revenue, expenses and net assets — each indexed to 100 at its first filing year, so you read the trajectory, not the magnitude. The shaded band is where the middle 50% of its peers' revenue would sit, given their growth.
The funding model — what share of revenue comes from contributions, programs, investments and other sources — and whether it's shifting.
60% of DELAWARE BIOSCIENCE ASSOCIATION INC’s revenue is contributions — more donation-reliant than the typical peer (59% for the typical peer).
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 0 of the last 8 reported years ran a deficit.
The base broadened — 1 funders to 2 as grant income moved $15k → $18k.
From the IRS filings of DELAWARE BIOSCIENCE ASSOCIATION INC’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
DELAWARE BIOSCIENCE ASSOCIATION INC leans on a few funders — its largest provides 46% of grant income and the top three 90%; half comes from just 2 funders.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 2 funders to its left
Largest funder’s share by year: 2019 100% · 2021 86% · 2022 100% · 2023 46% · 2024 57% — diversifying over time.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
DELAWARE BIOSCIENCE ASSOCIATION INC draws 100% of its grant income from funders outside Delaware — its reputation reaches beyond the state, across 3 states in all.
In-state vs out-of-state, by year
Grantmakers that don’t fund you yet, surfaced two ways: they back organizations that share your funders, or their grantees resemble your mission. The ones both signals agree on come first. Your 4 funders put you under-funded among the 400 organizations that share them.
From the co-funder graph (funders backing at least two comparable organizations, shrunk for grantee count, donor-advised and mega-funds excluded) and the universe embeddings. A research starting point; overlap is association, not a guarantee of fit.
Grants and contracts to this organization from federal (USASpending) and state checkbooks, reconciled to its EIN. $2.2M on record — $2.2M federal, $11k state.
Federal grants vs contracts are distinguished; state line items keep their reported category. Matched by name + geography (the BMF), so coverage is partial and precision-first.
Nonprofits whose mission and program text most resemble this one, by semantic similarity over the universe of US filings — the closest peers, and often the clearest route to shared or prospective funders.
Read directly from this organization’s own Form 990, as neutral context.
Every figure is read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML — this organization’s own return for FY2024 (financials across 2017–2024), and the filings of 4funders that report grants to it. “On record” means captured in the filings we have parsed — a funder that does not e-file, or whose grant detail is not itemized, will not appear. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind. view filing