Loading…
Loading…
Washington · Nonprofit
SWEDISH EDMONDS (Washington) is funded by 2 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $2,326,065 in grants to it, the largest being North Sound Accountable Community of Health ($1,169,379). 2 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
SWEDISH EDMONDS is better cushioned than half of the 1,388 health nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 1,388 health nonprofits over $100M, 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.
0% of SWEDISH EDMONDS’s revenue is contributions — about as donation-reliant as the typical peer (1% for the typical peer).
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 5 of the last 8 reported years ran a deficit.
$0 from 1 funders in 2024, up from $171k and 1 in 2018.
From the IRS filings of SWEDISH EDMONDS’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
SWEDISH EDMONDS leans on a few funders — its largest provides 50% of grant income and the top three 100%; 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 100% · 2019 100% · 2020 59% · 2021 56% · 2022 95% · 2023 100% — broadly stable.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
SWEDISH EDMONDS is locally rooted: 100% of its grant income comes from Washington 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.
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.
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.
89% of spending goes to programs.
Part of a family of 140 related entities
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 2funders 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