· Private foundation
Helen J Prince Foundation Security National Trust Co Trustee
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2019–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $5k
- $10k–50k9 grants · $173k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $293k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| THE OGLEBAY FOUNDATION | $175,000 |
| YOUTH SERVICES SYSTEM INC | $62,500 |
| WHEELING HEALTH RIGHT | $55,520 |
| WHEELING SYMPHONY SOCIETY | $35,000 |
| ORCHARD PARK HOSPITAL | $25,000 |
| WHEELING PARK HIGH SCHOOL BAND | $24,210 |
| HOUSE OF THE CARPENTER | $22,500 |
| NORTHERN PANHANDLE CONSERVATION DISTRICT | $20,000 |
| EASTER SEAL REHABILITATION CENTER | $14,800 |
| MIDDLE CREEK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL | $11,234 |
| OGLEBAY INSTITUTE | $10,000 |
| UNITED WAY OF THE UPPER OHIO VALLEY | $10,000 |
| WOODSDALE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL | $4,924 |
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 (FY19–25, $483k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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.
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 +28% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
9 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2025, 1 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, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $61k 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
- OFOGLEBAY FOUNDATION INC7× · 2019–2025 · $1.1M · revenue +118%
- YSYOUTH SERVICES SYSTEM INC7× · 2019–2025 · $390k · revenue +28%
- WHWHEELING HEALTH RIGHT INC6× · 2020–2025 · $232k · revenue +24%
Funded once
- CICOMMUNITY IMPACT NETWORK INCone grant, 2024 · $25k · revenue -42%
- WPWHEELING PARK HIGH SCHOOLone grant, 2019 · $15k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2022 · $10k
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.
Establish, conduct, implement, operate, coordinate and finance programs for the benefit of the low-income, minority, elderly, disadvantaged and handicapped citizens of wayne county, wv
Provide services to people with disabilities. such services include assistance with housing, employment, transportation and recreational issues.
To improve the quality of life throughout the life cycle by strengthening individuals, families, communities, alleviating human suffering and advocating policies & services which promote human dignity and self-sufficiency.
At united way of north central ohio, we bring people, organizations, and resources together to create solutions that improve the lives of every person in every community in our region.
To provide quality healthcare to all individuals, emphasizing outreach to those who are underserved. valley health strives to ensure that quality healthcare is readily accessible to everyone and serves patients regardless of their ability…
The organization operates a childhood center in oberlin, ohio for up tp 100 children ages six weeks to five years old. the center provides a unique, child centered campus for anyone in need regardless of financial ability.
The mission of ohio valley goodwill industries rehabilitation center, inc. is to provide vocational rehabilitation, training, and employment services to individuals with either disabilities or social and economic barriers to full employment
To facilitate coordinated wrap-around service to benefit homeless individuals in the city of wheeling and ohio county.
To provide care to childen and their families through a range of services that promote healthy growth and improve the quality of family life
Oberlin community services council is a responsive community organization that provides direct assistance, referrals, outreach and educational support to lorain county residents who struggle to meet basic needs.
Services to challenged individuals in Vocational,Residential, Home Based, and Community settings.
Ohio hills health services is a non-profit health care operation, organized by communities in eastern ohio to promote healthy lifestyles and to provide preventative and comprehensive medical and dental care for area residents. the primary…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is United Way of the Upper Ohio Valley Inc and the most unlike its peers is Easter Seal Rehabilitation Center Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
11 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. 11 of the 21 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 OGLEBAY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds YOUTH SERVICES SYSTEM INC ↗
- Who funds WHEELING HEALTH RIGHT INC ↗
- Who funds WHEELING SYMPHONY SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds THE HOUSE OF THE CARPENTER INC ↗
- Who funds OGLEBAY INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY FOUNDATION FOR THE OHIO VALLEY INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY IMPACT NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds EASTER SEAL REHABILITATION CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF THE UPPER OHIO VALLEY INC ↗
- Who funds LAUGHLIN COMMUNITY CENTER ↗
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: Albert Schenk III & Kathleen H Schenk Charitable Trust · James B Chambers Memorial · Elizabeth Stifel Kline Foundation · Stamp 2001 Charitable Fund · August J & Thelma S Hoffmann Foundation · The Banford & Terri Exley Family Foundation Inc · Raymond A & Gertrude D Hyer Foundation · Hess Family Foundation · Harry and Helen Sands Charitable Trust · Stamp Charitable Fund · Robinson S Parlin Trust · W E Stone 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 Helen J Prince Foundation Security National Trust Co Trustee 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Helen J Prince Foundation Security National Trust Co Trustee?
Find your warmest path to Helen J Prince Foundation Security National Trust Co Trustee through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.