Skip to content

Massachusetts · Nonprofit

EcoHealth Alliance Inc

EcoHealth Alliance Inc (Massachusetts) receives grants from 58 organizations whose IRS filings report $6,483,920 to it, the largest being GATES FOUNDATION ($1,499,414). 29 of them have funded it in more than one year.

Revenue FY2025
$8.4M
Funders on record
58
Grants received
$6.5M
Net assets
$1.1M
29/58 repeat funderspeak grant-dependency 19%
01What it does

What EcoHealth Alliance Inc does

Mission

EcoHealth Alliance integrates innovative science-based solutions and partnerships that increase capacity to achieve two interrelated goals: protecting global health by preventing the outbreak of emerging diseases and safeguarding ecosystems by promoting conservation.

As stated on its FY2025 Form 990.

Programs

  1. Conservation Works-Liberia: Liberia Conservation Works (CW) is designed to protect threatened and endangered species by strengthening protected and conserved areas while promoting economic growth in Liberia. CW supports communities in becoming less reliant on forest resources by providing livelihood alternatives, including sustainable agriculture and ecotourism. CW works closely with the Government of Liberia, private sector partners, and local conservation stakeholders and communities.

    $5,287,718 spentof which $3,964,962 as grants
    41% of program spending
  2. DTRA RVFV- Reducing the Threat of Rift Valley Fever through Ecology, Epidemiology and Socio-Economics: The objective of this grant is to reduce the threat of RVF by improving the understanding of RVFV circulation during inter-epidemic periods, improving local capacity to predict periods of high risk for RVF outbreaks and determining the multi-sectoral cost of RVF in the Republic of South Africa (RSA). Studies in the Free State/Northern Cape (FS/NC) and KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) regions will generate new understanding of RVF maintenance, circulation and impacts and improve risk prediction models for the country. Through multi-disciplinary investigation of three core hypotheses, the project shall strengthen South Africa's leadership role within the African continent to reduce the threat of RVF and other vector-borne diseases through the characterization of RVFV epidemiology and ecology in tropical and temperate ecosystems.

    $1,405,356 spentof which $500,106 as grants
    11% of program spending
  3. DTRA CCHF: The objective of this grant is to reduce the threat of Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever (CCHF) by determining the presence and scale of CCHF virus (CCHFV) circulation in Tanzania. The awardee shall establish a multi-disciplinary team of Tanzanian and international One Health professionals to collect fundamental data on CCHFV, conduct rigorous scientific analyses and support the Government of Tanzania in the development of policies to control and reduce the threat of CCHF. Using a One Health approach the awardee shall investigate the following three hypotheses: 1) CCHFV is circulating in ticks, livestock and wildlife in Tanzania; 2) CCHFV is present and circulating in the human population in Tanzania; 3) CCHFV prevalence, seroprevalence and vector abundance will vary across an environmental disturbance gradient from peri-urban communities, to pastoral rangelands, to protected wildlife areas. The awardee shall support the capacity of Tanzanian human and animal health laboratories to detect anti-CCHFV antibodies, train Tanzanian field researchers and provide vital data to Tanzanian government partners and stakeholders to develop policies to prepare for and reduce the threat…

    $1,256,174 spentof which $609,721 as grants
    10% of program spending
  4. DTRA Jordan: The objective of this grant is to reduce the threat of high-consequence zoonotic pathogens in Jordan and improve regional disease surveillance capacity. Jordan faces risk of several zoonoses of concern to human and animal health, including Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS-CoV) and Avian Influenza (AI), with fundamental knowledge and capacity gaps around the distribution and determinants of zoonoses. Recent work by our team detected MERS-CoV in camels and people in Jordan, suggesting ongoing and unmitigated transmission risk of a priority pathogen. The study generates critical advances in determining the presence of zoonotic pathogens in the country and opportunities for public health intervention. Through a prospective human cohort study coordinated with animal sampling, we will conduct biological and behavioral surveillance in five regions of Jordan with livestock production interfaces to determine the presence and risk factors for MERS-CoV, AI, brucellosis, and leptospirosis to identify modifiable risk factors.

    $1,010,180 spentof which $299,996 as grants
    8% of program spending
  5. DTRA Liberia- Reducing the threat from high-risk pathogens causing febrile illness in Liberia: This project's goal is to build Liberian capacity for threat reduction through an integrated human-animal surveillance approach to high consequence zoonotic pathogens associated with human acute febrile illness (AFI). AFI is a group of illnesses caused by a variety of pathogens difficult to differentiate clinically due to similarities in presentation. While there is no universal definition, AFI is often considered as rapid onset (i.e., acute) fever with or without related symptoms (headache, chills, joint pain). Many AFI causative agents may go undetected empirically by common rapid diagnostic tests or by existing surveillance platforms. We will work to mitigate this challenge through scientific discovery, hypothesis testing, and capacity building while leveraging significant U.S. government and other investment in workforce building and laboratory infrastructure.

    $973,777 spentof which $374,304 as grants
    7% of program spending
  6. Other programs including the study of Nipah Virus, Crimean-Congo Hemorrhagic Fever, biosurveillance for spillover of Hemipaviruses and floviruses in rural India, and reducing threat from high-risk pathogens causing febrile illnesses in Liberia.

    $3,056,787 spentof which $469,325 as grants$48,829 earned by the program
    24% of program spending

The 6 programs described on its FY2023 Form 990, listed largest first by expense. Program spending in total: $12,989,992.

02The organization over time

The organization over time

Each line starts at 100 in 2017, so what you read is the shape rather than the size: 150 means half as much again as 2017, 50 means half. The number beside each label in the key is where it ended. The shaded band is where the middle 50% of its peers' revenue would sit, given their growth.

100 = 20172017 Revenue 100 ($14M) Expenses 100 ($14M) Net assets 100 ($4.8M)2018 Revenue 117 ($16M) Expenses 119 ($16M) Net assets 105 ($5.0M)2019 Revenue 128 ($18M) Expenses 121 ($17M) Net assets 139 ($6.7M)2020 Revenue 81 ($11M) Expenses 73 ($10M) Net assets 162 ($7.8M)2021 Revenue 84 ($12M) Expenses 79 ($11M) Net assets 193 ($9.3M)2022 Revenue 102 ($14M) Expenses 108 ($15M) Net assets 171 ($8.2M)2023 Revenue 128 ($18M) Expenses 139 ($19M) Net assets 158 ($7.6M)2024 Revenue 122 ($17M) Expenses 138 ($19M) Net assets 114 ($5.5M)2025 Revenue 60 ($8.4M) Expenses 87 ($12M) Net assets 24 ($1.1M)
'17'18'19'20'21'22'23'24'25
Revenue (60)Expenses (87)Net assets (24)Peer revenue range

Balance sheet

Total assets and total liabilities at each year end, in dollars. The largest one-year move in total assets was 2024 to 2025, from $14M to $1.9M (−86%).

$6.9M
$7.1M
$8.6M
$9.7M
$12M
$11M
$16M
$14M
$1.9M
'17'18'19'20'21'22'23'24'25
Total assetsTotal liabilities

How it's funded, over time

Each bar is one year's revenue split into where it came from, and every bar is the same height — these are shares, not amounts, so a year that raised twice as much looks the same size. Hover a bar for the split.

2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
ContributionsProgram revenueInvestmentOther

Government-grant reliance: 2017 92% · 2018 92% · 2019 86% · 2020 67% · 2021 75% · 2022 87% · 2023 91% · 2024 78% · 2025 72%. Grants only. Government contracts and fees sit inside program revenue.

87% of EcoHealth Alliance Inc’s revenue is contributions — more donation-reliant than the typical peer (74% for the typical peer).

This organization
Typical peer · 1,657 orgs

Surplus & reserves

Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 4 of the last 9 reported years ran a deficit.

$346k
’17
$222k
’18
$1.4M
’19
$1.3M
’20
$979k
’21
−$565k
’22
−$1.1M
’23
−$1.8M
’24
−$3.5M
’25
0.0
months of
reserve

Leadership and staff

The officers, directors, trustees and key employees listed on each return. Joined and no longer listed compare each filing with the year before, matching people by surname and first initial; a year after a gap, or a roster under three people, has no comparison.

'17'18'19'20'21'22'23'24'25
Listed353433343937363533
Joined·+10+3+8+12+3+5+10+6
No longer listed·1147756118
03Who funds it

Who funds it, year by year

2017 → 2023: the base broadened from 9 funders to 14 funders, grant income rose $136k → $1.6M.

12 of 58 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 24% of grant dollars received. That money is really individual donors directing a sponsor; the institutions to cultivate are the non-DAF funders.

From the IRS filings of EcoHealth Alliance Inc’s funders (the co-funder graph). Top 30 of 58 funders by total. Association, not causation. Trends are read to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving. FY2024–FY2026 are still being filed and are shown unshaded; they do not move any figure on this page.

How concentrated its funding is

EcoHealth Alliance Inc has a broad base — no single funder exceeds 23% of grant income, and it takes 3 funders to reach half.

the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 3 funders to its left

43% of the income these shares are computed over arrives through pass-through sponsors or from payers whose filings do not say what kind of payment it is. Concentration is still measured over all of it, because the money is real; what it does not support is a claim about how many institutions have chosen to fund EcoHealth Alliance Inc.

23%
largest funder
50%
top three
~9
effective funders

Largest funder’s share by year: 2017 39% · 2018 51% · 2019 27% · 2020 28% · 2021 45% · 2022 57% · 2023 55% — growing more concentrated.

“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration. Trends are read to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving. FY2024–FY2026 are still being filed and are shown unshaded; they do not move any figure on this page.

How long its funders stay

39% of EcoHealth Alliance Inc's funders are still giving 3 years after their first grant; 50% give in more than one year at all.

first grant+1y+2y+3y+4y+5y+6y

Share of funders still giving k years after their first recorded grant, pooled across every acquisition cohort. A funder counts as retained in a year only if it made a grant that year. Measured to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving — a funder cannot be counted as lapsed in a year most filers have not reached.

Where its funders are

EcoHealth Alliance Inc draws 97% of its grant income from funders outside Massachusetts, across 17 states in all.

WA
MN
NY
MA
IA
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
MO
DE
NC
DC
LA
TX
FL

In-state vs out-of-state, by year

’17
’18
’19
’20
’21
’22
’23
Massachusetts out of state home

Funder states come from each funder’s own filing. $1.5M arriving through sponsors registered in 9 states is excluded from the map and the split above: a sponsor holds money on a donor’s behalf, so its registered address would place those dollars somewhere no donor need ever have been. Trends are read to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving. FY2024–FY2026 are still being filed and are shown unshaded; they do not move any figure on this page.

04Its place in the field

Against its field

EcoHealth Alliance Inc's funding base is broadening — from 9 funders to 14 as grant income climbed.

Operating margin−41% · bottom quartile
Months of reserve0.0mo · bottom quartile
Revenue growth (annualized)−6% · bottom quartile

this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 717 animals nonprofits $1M–$10M, FY2025

Government funding EcoHealth Alliance Inc receives

Grants and contracts to this organization from federal (USASpending) and state checkbooks, reconciled to its EIN. $42.7M on record.

Federal$42.7M
grants $40.7Mcontracts $2.1M
17
18
19
21
22
23
24
Top agencies
  • Agency for International Development$15.3M
  • Department of Defense$14.9M
  • Department of Health and Human Services$9.9M
  • Department of Homeland Security$2.1M
  • National Science Foundation$573k

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.

Organizations like EcoHealth Alliance Inc

Organizations whose mission and program text most resemble this one, by semantic similarity over every organization in the US filings — the closest peers, and often the clearest route to shared or prospective funders.

In Massachusetts

Nationally

05Profile & governance

Read directly from this organization’s own Form 990, as neutral context.

Where the money goes

62% of spending goes to programs.

Program 62%Management 38%Fundraising 0%

Governance

22
board members
95%
independent
✓Conflict-of-interest policy✓Whistleblower policy✓Document retention✓Board reviewed the 990–Audited financials

Public support

99%

Share of support from the public (Schedule A) — the basis for its public-charity status.

Footprint & structure

Files a return copy in 35 states

AK
ME
NH
WA
MN
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
OH
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
UT
CO
KY
WV
VA
MD
AZ
KS
AR
TN
NC
SC
DC
HI
OK
LA
AL
GA
FL

Part of a family of 1 related entity

  • Wildlife Preservation TR International · exempt

Screen this organization

A dated, signed PDF of the compliance screen for EcoHealth Alliance Inc: IRS status (Business Master File, Publication 78, auto-revocation), the OFAC sanctions lists, the Internal Revenue Bulletin, and California registration, with the Rev. Proc. 2018-32 §8.01 reliance elements stated element by element. Generated from the current files at the moment you download it.

A paid feature, included from the $75 plan up. Sign in to download.

Screens are triage, not determinations; a source that cannot be read reports not screened, never clear. Screen this nonprofit · How the screen works · on the API as GET /api/screening/{ein}?format=pdf

Questions and answers

Who funds EcoHealth Alliance Inc?
EcoHealth Alliance Inc (Massachusetts) receives grants from 58 organizations whose IRS filings report $6,483,920 to it, the largest being GATES FOUNDATION ($1,499,414). 29 of them have funded it in more than one year.
How many funders does EcoHealth Alliance Inc have?
IRS filings report 58 organizations giving $6,483,920 in grants to EcoHealth Alliance Inc, 29 of which have funded it in more than one year.
Who is the largest funder of EcoHealth Alliance Inc?
GATES FOUNDATION is the largest funder on record, with $1,499,414 in grants. The full list of funders is on this page.
How can an organization like EcoHealth Alliance Inc find more funders?
Start with the funders already giving here, then look at the foundations that back similar organizations in Massachusetts. The funding by cause and by state pages list the largest funders for a given area and how to approach them.

These figures are read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML: this organization’s own return for FY2025 (financials across 2017–2025), and the filings of 58 funders 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. Trends on this page end at FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving; later years are shown and marked, and move no figure. Data on this page was exported October 14, 2026. What this page cannot tell you · view filing