· Private foundation
Alfred H Lander and Janet L Lander Family
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 61% of ALFRED H LANDER AND JANET L LANDER FAMILY’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k12 grants · $42k
- $10k–50k8 grants · $149k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $77k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| RAIL 66 | $76,606 |
| WHITINSVILLE CHRISTIAN SCHOOL | $30,000 |
| CLARION FOREST VNA INC | $26,000 |
| NOURISH NOW | $25,000 |
| YMCA | $20,000 |
| ST JOSEPH SCHOOL | $17,645 |
| TWO TOP MOUNTAIN ADAPTIVE SPORTS FDN IN | $10,000 |
| IXTATAN FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC | $10,000 |
| UNITED WAY OF CLARION COUNTY | $7,095 |
| WATER IS BASIC | $5,000 |
| INNOVATION SCHOOL CORP | $5,000 |
| USA CARES INC | $5,000 |
| COMMUNITY FDN OF THE TEXAS HILL COUNTRY | $5,000 |
| WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT | $4,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY22–25, $11k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 9% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of 0% since the first grant, against -7% for the ones you funded once.
27 repeat relationships — 15 still active in FY2025, 12 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $26k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as “new.” Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.
Backed again, and grew
- WCWHITINSVILLE CHRISTIAN SCHOOL6× · 2020–2025 · $128k · revenue +40%
- CUCLARION UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC3× · 2017–2019 · $95k · revenue +98%
- UWUNITED WAY OF CLARION COUNTY5× · 2021–2025 · $53k · revenue +50%
Funded once
- DFDOLPHIN FOUNDATIONone grant, 2022 · $88k
- Y(YMCA (BP DRIVE CONNECTOR PROJ)one grant, 2019 · $30k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2018 · $30k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
The protection, preservation of life and property during emergencies as may occur in the Borough of Clearfield and surrounding communities.
Provide fire extinguishment services for the township and promote fire prevention and fire safety to the community through public awareness.
To preserve life and promote health and safety in our community.
Volunteer Fire Department
We are a volunteer fire company with a 96 square mile fire district. we provide fire suppression, first response, first aid, and accident scene control and services.
We provide fire and emergency medical services, fire prevention, and public education to the city of chardon, chardon township and claridon township.
Fire protection and rescue.
All volunteer fire department provides fire and rescue services to the surrounding communities.
Community service - providing protection from fire and emergency medical services for accidents.
To provide protection and emergency medical services to residents of north wales borough, lower gwynedd township, upper gwynedd township and surrounding communities.
Fire and emergency services
To provide leadership in our communities to 1) identify our most pressing human care needs, 2) to work together to direct the time, energy and resources towards addressing those needs to improve our quality of life.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Girl Scouts Western Pennsylvania and the most unlike its peers is Capital Area Food Bank Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 42 years old; the field is 19. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 9% of your grantees by number, and just 8% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 9% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
27 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 27 of the 72 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds Rail 66 Country Trail ↗
- Who funds CLARION FOREST VNA INC ↗
- Who funds WHITINSVILLE CHRISTIAN SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds CLARION UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF CLARION COUNTY ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds NOURISH NOW FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds IXTATAN FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS INC ↗
- Who funds Farmington Township Volunteer Fire Company ↗
- Who funds Two Top Mountain Adaptive Sports Foundation ↗
- Who funds CLARION FIRE AND HOSE COMPANY NO 1 ↗
- Who funds WASHINGTON TWP VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT INC ↗
- Who funds JEFFERSON EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY OF ERIE INC ↗
- Who funds NORTHWEST HOSPITAL FOUNDATION ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Samuel-Edith Justus Char Trust · Arthur W Phillips Trust Uw · McElhattan Foundation · AbbVie Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Alfred H Lander and Janet L Lander Family funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending — grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12–24 months.