Skip to content
Good Samaritan Health Services Foundation of Lebanon Pa at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Good Samaritan Health Services Foundation of Lebanon Pa

The purpose of the foundation is to support the program and equipment needs of the good samaritan health system, the good samaritan hospital of lebanon pennsylvania and its tax-exempt corporation entities, in accordance with their missions.

$327k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$323k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02Its granteesRead
03Its 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, FY2017 to 2025.

Health$17M
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$322,520
Median grant
1
States reached
$5.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE GOOD SAMARITAN HOSPITAL OF LEBANON PENNSYLVANIA$322,520
02Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$17M · 4 repeat orgs$29k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +94% since the first grant, against +27% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
2

Total granted

$17M
$29k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+94%
+27%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time
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

  • TG
    THE GOOD SAMARITAN HOSPITAL OF LEBANON PENNSYLVANIA
    9× · 2017–2025 · $11M · revenue +94%
  • WH
    WELLSPAN HEALTH CARE SERVICES
    2× · 2017–2018 · $6.2M · revenue +317% · 55% of their budget
  • WH
    WELLSPAN HEALTH
    4× · 2020–2023 · $208k · revenue +82%

Funded once

  • P
    PHILHAVENgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $20k · revenue +27%
  • VH
    VNA HOME HEALTH SERVICES
    one grant, 2019 · $9k · revenue +16%
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.

03Its field
03the grantee network

6 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.

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

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/6
Grantees still filing
6/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE GOOD SAMARITAN HOSPITAL OF LEBANON PENNSYLVANIA: $10,739,836 · HealthTHE GOOD SAMARITAN HOSPITAL OF LEBANON PENNSYLVANIAWELLSPAN HEALTH CARE SERVICES: $6,156,102 · HealthWELLSPAN HEALTH CARE SERVICES+3 more: $285,265 · HealthVNA HOME HEALTH SERVICES: $8,900 · Other
Health$17,181,203Other$8,900

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

25%50%75%100%$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE GOOD SAMARITAN HOSPITAL OF LEBANON PENNSYLVANIA: $10,739,836 over 9y, 1.4% of budgetWELLSPAN HEALTH CARE SERVICES: $6,156,102 over 2y, 55% of budgetWELLSPAN HEALTH: $208,379 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetWELLSPAN MEDICAL GROUP: $56,886 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPHILHAVEN: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVNA HOME HEALTH SERVICES: $8,900 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Summit Health Foundat…
Summit Health FoundationPA13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Summit Health 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 Good Samaritan Health Services Foundation of Lebanon Pa funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Good Samaritan Health Services Foundation of Lebanon Pa. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%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
    3report 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, FY20–25
    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 6 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 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 Good Samaritan Health Services Foundation of Lebanon Pa’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