Skip to content

· Private foundation

Joseph Bilinski 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.

$33k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$20k
Largest
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 2024.

Youth Development$37kHealth$27kCrime & Legal$25kFood & Nutrition$23kEducation$4kAnimals$2k
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$1.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
A MEANINGFUL PURPOSE$20,000
MISSION KIDS CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER$5,000
CITY HARVEST$5,000
ALS OF GREATER NY$2,500
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:

Its human-services grants (FY18–18, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 22%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%STILLSTRONG FOUNDATION: $1k → 22%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.

77%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$114k · 9 repeat orgs$35k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +52% since the first grant, against +15% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
10

Total granted

$114k
$28k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+52%
+15%

Still filing today

33%
30%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 77% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’21’22’23’24’25
Crime & LegalAnimalsHealthEducationHuman ServicesFood & 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

  • MK
    MISSION KIDS CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER
    8× · 2017–2025 · $30k · revenue +490%
  • AM
    A MEANINGFUL PURPOSE INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $23k · revenue 0%
  • TC
    THE CHILDHOOD RESILIENCE FOUNDATION
    8× · 2017–2025 · $23k

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    3× · 2023–2025 · $10k
  • CP
    CAMP PALS
    6× · 2019–2025 · $5k
  • TT
    THE TIMOTHY SCHOOL CORPORATIONgraduated
    8× · 2017–2025 · $3k · revenue +56%
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
The Food Trust

The food trust (tft), a nonprofit founded in philadelphia in 1992, strives to make healthy food available to all.continued on schedule otft is a regional and national leader in developing new strategies to prevent childhood obesity and…

Food & Nutrition
2
Stc Healthcare Partners Llc

Website: https://towerhealth.org/locations/st-christophers-hospital- children stc opco, llc (st. christopher's hospital for children) provides a full range of high-quality healthcare services to all children and youth up to age 21 who seek…

Health
3
Philadelphia Health Partnership
Health
4
The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia

The children's hospital of philadelphia, the oldest hospital in the united states dedicated exclusively to pediatrics, strives to be the world leader in the advancement of health care for children by integrating excellent patient care,…

Health
5
Drexel University

Drexel university fulfills its founder's vision of preparing each new generation of students for productive professional and civic lives while also focusing its collective expertise on solving society's greatest problems. drexel is an…

Education
6
Temple University Hospital Inc

See Schedule OOur mission is to support Temple University and its Health Sciences Center academic programs by providing the clinical environment and service to support the highest quality teaching and training programs for health care…

Health
7
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.

Health
8
Philadelphia University

The organization is an affiliate within thomas jefferson university/jefferson health; a comprehensive professional university and tax-exempt integrated healthcare delivery system ("system"), with a tripartite mission of education, research…

Education
9
Lehigh Valley Hospital

Our mission is to heal, comfort and care for the people of our community by providing advanced and compassionate health care of superior quality and value, supported by education and research.

Health
10
St Joseph's Health System Subordinate Group Return

We are committed to providing exceptional quality care which sustains and improves both individual and community health, with a special concern for those who are poor, vulnerable and underserved.

—
11
The Johns Hopkins Hospital

For more than 125 years, the mission of the johns hopkins hospital has been to lead the world in the diagnosis and treatment of disease and to train tomorrow's great physicians, nurses and scientists. above all, we aim to provide the…

Health
12
Highmark Health Group

Working as an integrated system within highmark health, employees at all of ahn's care sites, including hospitals, health + wellness pavilions, primary and specialty care offices and more, are committed to improving health and promoting…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Timothy School Corporation; the most unlike its peers is A Meaningful Purpose 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

13 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. 13 of the 21 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
10/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE CHILDHOOD RESILIENCE FOUNDATION: $22,500 · OtherTHE CHILDHOOD RESILIENCE FOUNDATIONREEDS FARM: $15,500 · OtherREEDS FARMIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCHILDRENS HOSPITAL OF PHILA: $6,500 · OtherCHILDRENS HOSPITAL OF PHILAIndividual grant recipient: $6,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCAMP PALS: $5,000 · OtherCAMP PALSCHILDRENS TREATMENT CENTER: $4,000 · Other+8 more: $13,000 · Other+8 moreMISSION KIDS CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER: $30,000 · Crime & LegalMISSION KIDS CHILD ADV…A MEANINGFUL PURPOSE INC: $23,000 · AnimalsA MEANINGFUL PURP…CITY HARVEST INC: $5,000 · Food & NutritionVETRI FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN: $4,000 · HealthTHE TIMOTHY SCHOOL CORPORATION: $3,000 · EducationSTILL STRONG FOUNDATION: $1,000 · Human Services
Other$83,000Crime & Legal$30,000Animals$23,000Food & Nutrition$5,000Health$4,000Education$3,000Human Services$1,000

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 budgetMISSION KIDS CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER: $30,000 over 8y, 0.4% of budgetA MEANINGFUL PURPOSE INC: $23,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCITY HARVEST INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVETRI FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN: $4,000 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetTHE TIMOTHY SCHOOL CORPORATION: $3,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetCITY YEAR INC: $1,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetSTILL STRONG FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 7y, 0.5% 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.

  • Who funds MISSION KIDS CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER ↗
  • Who funds A MEANINGFUL PURPOSE INC ↗
  • Who funds CITY HARVEST INC ↗
  • Who funds VETRI FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN ↗
  • Who funds THE TIMOTHY SCHOOL CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds CITY YEAR INC ↗
  • Who funds STILL STRONG FOUNDATION ↗

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 Philadelphia FoundationPA15.3× affinity5 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Philadelphia Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Charities Aid Foundation America · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Joseph Bilinski Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Joseph Bilinski Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 11%
  • City Year Inc: 11% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
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 21 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 Joseph Bilinski’s filings →

More from the funding graph