Skip to content
Engler Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Engler Family Foundation

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.

$92k
Granted FY2025still arriving
15
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$82k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0192% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

Education$500kPublic Benefit$180kEnvironment$64kRecreation & Sports$21kHealth$20kCrime & Legal$15kFood & Nutrition$14kYouth Development$12kOther$0
02FY2025 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k14 grants · $10k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $82k
$1,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY$81,666
RACHEL CARSON TRAILS CONSERVANCY$2,000
BIKE PITTSBURGH$1,000
ALLEGHENY CLEANWAYS$1,000
ALLEGHENY LAND TRUST$1,000
CARNEGIE MUSEUMS OF PITTSBURGH$1,000
INGOMAR UNITED METHODIST CHURCH$1,000
THE KINGSLEY ASSOCIATION$1,000
TREE PITTSBURGH$500
WIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION$250
Individual grant recipient$250
ANIMAL FRIENDS$250
412 FOOD RESCUE$250
GROUP AGAINST SMOG AND POLLUTION$250
PITTSBURGH COMMUNITY BROADCASTING$250
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 (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 98% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%RCTC: $2k → 9%412 FOOD RESCUE: $10k → 11%UNIVERISTY OF PENSYLVANIA: $25k → 22%WIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION: $1k → 10%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $10k → 17%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $3k → 14%HAPPELIFE: $10k → 8%SPLC: $3k → 18%NARA: $3k → 12%NATIVE HOPE: $1k → 15%RCTC: $2k → 9%412 FOOD RESCUE: $3k → 11%UNIVERISTY OF PENSYLVANIA: $10k → 22%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $4k → 17%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $1k → 14%HAPPELIFE: $2k → 8%SPLC: $1k → 18%NATIVE HOPE: $1k → 15%THE KINGSLEY ASSOCIATION: $1k → 11%MONTOUR TRAIL COUNCIL: $1k → 11%BIKE PITTSBURGH: $100k → 11%BIKE PITTSBURGH: $75k → 11%ALLEGHENY LAND TRUST: $20k → 11%BIKE PITTSBURGH: $4k → 11%ALLEGHENY LAND TRUST: $16k → 11%BIKE PITTSBURGH: $1k → 11%ALLEGHENY LAND TRUST: $3k → 11%ALLEGHENY LAND TRUST: $1k → 11%USACDA: $13k → 11%RACHEL CARSON TRAILS CONSERVANCY: $5k → 11%GASP: $1k → 11%RACHEL CARSON TRAILS CONSERVANCY: $2k → 11%INGOMAR LIVING WATERS: $4k → 11%ANIMAL FRIENDS: $1k → 11%ANIMAL FRIENDS: $1k → 11%INGOMAR UNITED METHODIST CHURCH: $1k → 11%CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY: $77k → 11%CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY: $160k → 11%CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY: $82k → 11%CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY: $80k → 11%CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY: $60k → 11%MELLON UNIVERSITY: $40k → 11%ALLEGHENY CLEANWAYS: $2k → 11%ALLEGHENY CLEANWAYS: $2k → 11%HCV: $11k → 11%HOMEWOOD CHILDREN'S VILLAGE: $11k → 11%KIDS VOICE: $10k → 11%KIDS VOICE: $5k → 11%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.

Which US states its grants reach

MN
MI
NY
OR
SD
PA
CA
DC
AL
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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$821k · 23 repeat orgs$75k to everyone else

23 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

23
11

Total granted

$821k
$73k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+11%
+16%

Still filing today

74%
36%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentCrime & LegalArts & CultureHealthPublic BenefitFood & NutritionOther
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

  • CM
    Carnegie Mellon University
    5× · 2019–2025 · $458k · revenue +52%
  • BP
    BIKE PITTSBURGH INC
    4× · 2019–2025 · $180k · revenue +2%
  • AL
    ALLEGHENY LAND TRUST
    4× · 2022–2025 · $40k · revenue +46%

Funded once

  • MU
    MELLON UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2018 · $40k
  • U
    USACDA
    one grant, 2018 · $13k
  • H
    HCV
    one grant, 2022 · $11k
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
Zoological Society of Pittsburgh

The zoological society of pittsburgh is dedicated to being a leader in, and significant contributor to, the conservation of endangered and threatened species. the society provides an enjoyable family experience that fosters understanding,…

Animals
2
Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy

We improve quality of life by enhancing and stewarding pittsburgh's parks in partnership with the community.

Recreation & Sports
3
Western Pennsylvania Conservancy

The western pennsylvania conservancy protects and restores exceptional places to provide our region with clean waters and healthy forests, wildlife and natural areas for the benefit of present and future generations. the conservancy…

Environment
4
Scenic Pittsburgh

To protect, preserve, and promote the scenic resources of southwestern pennsylvania.

Environment
5
World Affairs Council of Pittsburgh

The world affairs council of pittsburgh's mission is to convene and connect people around global issues to build a competitive, thriving, and inclusive pittsburgh.

International
6
Allegheny County Conservation District

The Allegheny County Conservation District is an urban conservation district that engages and leads through partnerships, innovation, and implementation to conserve, promote, and improve Allegheny Countys natural resources.

Environment
7
Pidc Development Management Corporation

Pidc dmc administers and coordinates various development projects for the city and other not-for-profit entities.

Community Improvement
8
Pennsylvania Environmental Council Inc

The pennsylvania environmental council (pec) protects and restores the natural and built environments through innovation, collaboration, education, and advocacy. pec believes in the value of partnerships with the private sector,…

Environment
9
Sustainable Pittsburgh

Provide information to decision maker in the pittsburgh region to promote economic prosperity, social equity, and environmental quality for sustainable solutions for communities and businesses.

Environment
10
Riverlife

Riverlife's mission is to create, activate, and celebrate pittsburgh's riverfronts, connecting people through exceptional places and experiences.

Environment
11
Pittsburgh Entertainment Project

To create a vibrant, responsible, and sustainable film and digital media sector in southwestern pennsylvania.

—
12
Philadelphia Green Capital Corp

The philadelphia green capital corp. connects projects to capital (public, private and philanthropic) to drive a robust, equitable clean energy market in the greater philadelphia region, support the philadelphia energy authority, and…

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Friends of the Pittsburgh Urban Forest; the most unlike its peers is Natural Resources Defense Council Inc. 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

23 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. 23 of the 37 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
23/23
Grantees still filing
15/23
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Carnegie Mellon University: $458,332 · OtherCarnegie Mellon UniversityMELLON UNIVERSITY: $40,000 · OtherMELLON UNIVERSITYIndividual grant recipient: $35,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+21 more: $65,536 · Other+21 moreBIKE PITTSBURGH INC: $180,000 · Public BenefitBIKE PITTSBURGH INCALLEGHENY LAND TRUST: $40,063 · EnvironmentNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $14,250 · EnvironmentRachel Carson Trails Conservancy Inc: $7,000 · EnvironmentPA CLEANWAYS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY INC: $4,223 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $3,750 · Environment+2 more: $1,250 · EnvironmentKIDSVOICE: $15,250 · Crime & Legal+1 more: $250 · Crime & Legal412 FOOD RESCUE INC: $13,800 · Food & NutritionHOMEWOOD CHIDREN'S VILLAGE: $11,250 · Youth DevelopmentHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC: $6,250 · International
Other$598,868Public Benefit$180,000Environment$70,536Crime & Legal$15,500Food & Nutrition$13,800Youth Development$11,250International$6,250

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCarnegie Mellon University: $458,332 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetBIKE PITTSBURGH INC: $180,000 over 4y, 8.6% of budgetALLEGHENY LAND TRUST: $40,063 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetKIDSVOICE: $15,250 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $14,250 over 2y, 0.0% of budget412 FOOD RESCUE INC: $13,800 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetHOMEWOOD CHIDREN'S VILLAGE: $11,250 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetRachel Carson Trails Conservancy Inc: $7,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC: $6,250 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetPA CLEANWAYS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY INC: $4,223 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $3,750 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCARNEGIE INSTITUTE: $3,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNATIVE AMERICAN REHABILITATION ASSOCIATION OF THE NORTHWEST INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAnimal Friends Inc: $2,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetNATIVE HOPE INC: $2,250 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetWIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION INC: $1,250 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMONTOUR TRAIL COUNCIL: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE KINGSLEY ASSOCIATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE PITTSBURGH URBAN FOREST: $750 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGROUP AGAINST SMOG AND POLLUTION INC: $500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPITTSBURGH COMMUNITY BROADCASTING CORPORATION: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

The Pittsburgh Founda…The Grable FoundationRichard King Mellon F…The Heinz EndowmentsHillman Family Founda…Eqt FoundationThe Benter FoundationPeter C Dozzi Family …The Forbes FundsThe Burke Family Foun…The Burke FoundationFoundation for Pennsy…
The Pittsburgh FoundationPA24.8× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Pittsburgh Foundation · The Grable Foundation · Richard King Mellon Foundation · The Heinz Endowments · Hillman Family Foundations · Eqt Foundation · The Benter Foundation · Peter C Dozzi Family Foundation Aka Eugene Dozzi Charitable Foundation · The Forbes Funds · The Burke Family Foundation · The Burke Foundation · Foundation for Pennsylvania Watersheds

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 Engler Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Engler Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 16%
  • Native American Rehabilitation Association of the Northwest Inc: 16% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25
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 37 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 Engler Family’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