Loading…
Loading…
Tennessee · Nonprofit
Mountain States Health Alliance (Tennessee) is funded by 7 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $701,018 in grants to it, the largest being TENNESSEE HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION ($414,495). 5 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
Mountain States Health Alliance's revenue grew 34% between 2018 and 2023.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 1,976 health nonprofits over $100M, FY2023
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.
2% of Mountain States Health Alliance’s revenue is contributions — more donation-reliant than the typical peer (1% for the typical peer).
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 1 of the last 6 reported years ran a deficit.
$0 from 1 funders in 2025, up from $33k and 3 in 2018.
From the IRS filings of Mountain States Health Alliance’s funders (the co-funder graph). Top 6 of 7 funders by total. Association, not causation.
Mountain States Health Alliance leans on a few funders — its largest provides 59% of grant income and the top three 89%; half comes from just 1 funder.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 1 funder to its left
Largest funder’s share by year: 2018 73% · 2019 100% · 2020 79% · 2021 67% · 2022 46% · 2023 73% · 2024 97% — growing more concentrated.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
Mountain States Health Alliance is locally rooted: 62% of its grant income comes from Tennessee funders.
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 7 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. $8.5M on record — $8.5M federal, $463 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.
83% of spending goes to programs.
Operates in 2 states
Part of a family of 23 related entities
Every figure is read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML — this organization’s own return for FY2023 (financials across 2018–2023), and the filings of 7funders 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