Skip to content
Aurora R Kittredge Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Aurora R Kittredge Charitable Trust

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$111k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$33k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2025.

Animals$167kEducation$115kRecreation & Sports$91kPhilanthropy$84kReligion$56kHealth$45k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $11k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $100k
$11,130
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HUMANE SOCIETY OF MERCER COUNTY$33,391
COMMUNITY LIBRARY OF THE$27,826
UNITED WAY OF MERCER COUNTY$16,696
COMMUNITY RECREATION OF NORTHERN$11,130
ST JOHN'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH$11,130
BUHL PARK CORPORATION$5,565
BUHL COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER$5,565
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY21–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 7% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%COMMUNITY RECREATION OF NORTHERN: $11k → 13%MAPLE TREE CANCER ALLIANCE: $20k → 14%HUMANE SOCIETY OF MERCER COUNTY: $61k → 13%MAPLE TREE CANCER ALLIANCE: $16k → 14%HUMANE SOCIETY OF MERCER COUNTY: $48k → 13%MAPLE TREE CANCER ALLIANCE: $4k → 14%HUMANE SOCIETY OF MERCER COUNTY: $33k → 13%UNITED WAY OF MERCER COUNTY: $30k → 13%UNITED WAY OF MERCER COUNTY: $24k → 13%UNITED WAY OF MERCER COUNTY: $17k → 13%HUMANE SOCIETY OF MERCER COUNTY: $13k → 13%HUMANE SOCIETY OF MERCER COUNTY: $12k → 13%BUHL PARK CORPORATION: $10k → 13%BUHL PARK CORPORATION: $8k → 13%UNITED WAY OF MERCER COUNTY: $7k → 13%UNITED WAY OF MERCER COUNTY: $6k → 13%BUHL PARK CORPORATION: $6k → 13%BUHL REGIONAL HEALTH FOUNDATION: $4k → 13%BUHL PARK CORPORATION: $2k → 13%BUHL PARK CORPORATION: $2k → 13%COMMUNITY LIBRARY OF THE: $40k → 13%BUHL COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER: $34k → 13%COMMUNITY LIBRARY OF THE: $28k → 13%COMMUNITY LIBRARY OF THE: $27k → 13%ST JOHN'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $20k → 13%ST JOHN'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $16k → 13%COMMUNITY LIBRARY OF THE: $11k → 13%ST JOHN'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $11k → 13%COMMUNITY LIBRARY OF THE: $10k → 13%BUHL COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER: $8k → 13%BUHL COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER: $6k → 13%ST JOHN'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $4k → 13%ST JOHN'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $4k → 13%BUHL COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER: $2k → 13%BUHL COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER: $2k → 13%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$542k · 7 repeat orgs$15k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +40% since the first grant, against -57% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
1

Total granted

$542k
$4k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+40%
-57%

Still filing today

86%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $11k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’21’22’23’24’25
PhilanthropyAnimalsEducationHealthRecreation & SportsOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • HS
    HUMANE SOCIETY OF MERCER COUNTY INC
    5× · 2021–2025 · $167k · revenue +50% · 34% of their budget
  • CL
    COMMUNITY LIBRARY OF THE SHENANGO VALLEY
    5× · 2021–2025 · $115k · revenue +9%
  • UW
    UNITED WAY OF MERCER COUNTY
    5× · 2021–2025 · $84k · revenue +40%

Funded once

  • BR
    BUHL REGIONAL HEALTH FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2021 · $4k · revenue -57%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Bremer Community Center Inc
Recreation & Sports
2
The Miller Center for Recreation and Wellness
Recreation & Sports
3
Christian Buehler Memorial
—
4
Children's Center of Mercer County

Provide childcare to working parents, promote early childhood education.

Health
5
Butler County Humane Society
Animals
6
Mercersburg Lions Community Park Association

Park renovations and community entertainment

Community Improvement
7
The Buhl Foundation Inc
—
8
Buhl Farm Trust

The trust is a type iii supporting organization engaged in owning & operating buhl park as a community park and public recreation facility. the trust was formed to own the park for the proper use, benefit, and enjoyment of the public…

Recreation & Sports
9
Mahr Park Xxx-Xx-Xxxx
Philanthropy
10
Merrick County Health & Fitness Ctr

To promote and meet the health, fitness and recreational needs of people of all ages and to enhance the quality of life through a wide range of programs, services, activities and education.

Recreation & Sports
11
Mutchler Community Center

Community recreation center

Recreation & Sports
12
Murrysville Community Library

The Murrysville Community Library serves the communitys evolving informational needs. We connect people with ideas and information, promote lifelong learning, and help build the community.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Buhl Community Recreation Center; the most unlike its peers is Buhl Regional Health Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

8 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 9 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HUMANE SOCIETY OF MERCER COUNTY INC: $167,104 · AnimalsHUMANE SOCIETY OF MERCER COUNTY IN…ST JOHN'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $55,701 · OtherST JOHN'S EPISCOPAL CHURCHBUHL COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER: $51,948 · OtherBUHL COMMUNITY RECREATION C…BUHL PARK CORPORATION: $27,850 · OtherBUHL PARK CORPORATIONCOMMUNITY LIBRARY OF THE SHENANGO VALLEY: $115,154 · EducationCOMMUNITY LIBRARY OF TH…UNITED WAY OF MERCER COUNTY: $83,555 · PhilanthropyUNITED WAY OF MER…BUHL REGIONAL HEALTH FOUNDATION: $3,988 · PhilanthropyMAPLE TREE CANCER ALLIANCE: $40,583 · HealthCOMMUNITY RECREATION OF NORTHERN MERCER COUNTY INC: $11,130 · Recreation & Sports
Animals$167,104Other$135,499Education$115,154Philanthropy$87,543Health$40,583Recreation & Sports$11,130

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF MERCER COUNTY INC: $167,104 over 5y, 34% of budgetCOMMUNITY LIBRARY OF THE SHENANGO VALLEY: $115,154 over 5y, 4.9% of budgetUNITED WAY OF MERCER COUNTY: $83,555 over 5y, 1.9% of budgetBUHL COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER: $51,948 over 5y, 1.7% of budgetMAPLE TREE CANCER ALLIANCE: $40,583 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetBUHL PARK CORPORATION: $27,850 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetBUHL REGIONAL HEALTH FOUNDATION: $3,988 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Community Foundation …Joseph P Kittredge Jr…Buhl Regional Health …James Frances McCandl…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Community Foundation of Western Pennsylvania and Eastern OhioPA19.8× affinity7 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation of Western Pennsylvania and Eastern Ohio · Joseph P Kittredge Jr Char Trust · Buhl Regional Health Foundation · James Frances McCandless Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Aurora R Kittredge Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Aurora R Kittredge Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 9 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Aurora R Kittredge’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home