Loading…
Loading…
Missouri · Nonprofit
WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER (Missouri) is funded by 8 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $6,670,554 in grants to it, the largest being BJC HEALTH SYSTEM GROUP RETURN ($6,372,257). 3 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Revenue, expenses and net assets — each indexed to 100 at its first filing year, so you read the trajectory, not the magnitude.
The funding model — what share of revenue comes from contributions, programs, investments and other sources — and whether it's shifting.
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 2 of the last 3 reported years ran a deficit.
The base broadened — 1 funders to 4 as grant income moved $25k → $844k.
3 of 8 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 1% 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 WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER leans on a few funders — its largest provides 96% of grant income and the top three 98%; 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: 2017 100% · 2019 100% · 2020 100% · 2021 82% · 2022 76% · 2023 100% · 2024 88% — diversifying over time.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
40% of WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER's funders are still giving 3 years after their first grant; 38% give in more than one year at all.
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.
WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER is locally rooted: 97% of its grant income comes from Missouri 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 8 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.
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.
85% of spending goes to programs.
Part of a family of 2 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 2021–2023), and the filings of 8funders 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