Skip to content
Leonard C Grasso Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Leonard C Grasso Charitable Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$19k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Religion$31kRecreation & Sports$28kFood & Nutrition$28kEducation$23kHuman Services$19kAnimals$9kArts & Culture$8kEnvironment$7kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $9k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$3,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CROSS ROADS PRESCHOOL$10,000
CROSS ROADS PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH$3,000
TAMARACK WILDLIFE CENTER$3,000
CARNEGIE LIBRARY$3,000
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 (FY17–20, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICE OF PITTSBURGH: $1k → 11%WOMEN'S CENTER & SHELTER OF GREATER PITTSBURGH: $3k → 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

WA
OH
PA
UT
WV
AZ
NC
DC
FL
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.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$138k · 12 repeat orgs$44k to everyone else

12 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
19

Total granted

$138k
$41k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+7%
+22%

Still filing today

67%
79%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentEducationRecreation & SportsHuman ServicesAnimalsArts & CultureOther
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

  • GP
    GREATER PITTSBURGH COMMUNITY FOOD BANK
    2× · 2020–2021 · $20k · revenue +13%
  • TW
    TAMARACK WILDLIFE CENTER
    3× · 2023–2025 · $8k · revenue +74%
  • PP
    PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF WESTERN PA INC
    3× · 2017–2023 · $7k · revenue +55%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $7k
  • RT
    REGIONAL TRAIL COUNCIL
    one grant, 2024 · $3k
  • WC
    WOMEN'S CENTER AND SHELTER OF GREATER PITTSBURGHgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $3k · revenue +28%
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
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
2
Scenic Pittsburgh

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

Environment
3
Riverlife

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

Environment
4
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
5
Pennsylvania Solar Center

We provide trusted guidance to usher all pennsylvanians into the clean energy economy to reach a sustainable and resilient tomorrow.

Environment
6
Great Allegheny Passage Conservancy

Founded in 1995 to coordinate the completion of the great allegheny passage, a 150-mile non-motorized path connecting pittsburgh and cumberland, maryland, the great allegheny passage conservancy promotes the great allegheny passage and…

Environment
7
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
8
Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor Inc

See schedule oper the bylaws of the delaware & lehigh national heritage corridor(which were updated by the merged board of the national canal musuem and the d&l), our mission is to work with government entities, non-profit organizations…

Arts & Culture
9
Point Park University

Provides innovative education in a dynamic urban setting. dedicated to academic excellence and community engagement,we prepare students of diverse backgrounds with the knowledge, skill,and experience to lead meaningful lives as informed…

—
10
Pittsburgh Botanic Garden

Pittsburgh Botanic Garden inspires people to value plants, garden design and the natural world by cultivating plant collections of the Allegheny Plateau and temperate regions, creating display gardens, conducting educational programs and…

Youth Development
11
Pacific Crest Trail Association

The pacific crest trail association's mission is to advocate for the pacific crest trail as an inspirational outdoor experience, to connect people to the pct, and to conserve the trail.

—
12
Fairmount Park Conservancy

Fairmount park conservancy brings parks to life. the conservancy works with the city of philadelphia and its communities to steward our parks and nurture our shared environment, cultural resources and public health. the conservancy leads…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy; the most unlike its peers is Cross Roads Presbyterian Ch. 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

24 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. 24 of the 32 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
23/24
Grantees still filing
16/24
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CROSS ROADS PRESBYTERIAN CH: $30,500 · OtherCROSS ROADS PRESBYTERIAN CHPITCARE INC: $15,000 · OtherPITCARE INCCROSS ROADS PRESCHOOL: $12,000 · OtherCROSS ROADS PRESCHOOLCROSS ROADS FOOD PANTRY: $8,000 · OtherCROSS ROADS FOOD PANTRYIndividual grant recipient: $7,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientMONROEVILLE PUBLIC LIBRARY: $6,000 · OtherMONROEVILLE PUBLIC LIBRARYRECONNECT EARTH CO ALLIANCE FOR GLOBAL JUSTICE: $4,500 · Other+13 more: $28,250 · Other+13 moreGREATER PITTSBURGH COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $20,000 · Food & NutritionGREATER PITT…EXPERIENCE LEARNING INC: $17,000 · Recreation & SportsEXPERIENCE …PITTSBURGH PARKS CONSERVANCY: $1,000 · Recreation & SportsPITTSBURGH …TAMARACK WILDLIFE CENTER: $8,000 · AnimalsTREASURE COAST MANATEE FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 · AnimalsPYMATUNING LAKE ASSOCIATION: $4,000 · EnvironmentPENNSYLVANIA PARKS AND FORESTS FOUNDATION INC: $2,000 · EnvironmentREGIONAL TRAIL CORPORATION: $2,000 · EnvironmentRAILS TO TRAILS CONSERVANCY: $1,000 · EnvironmentWQED MULTIMEDIA: $6,000 · Arts & CultureTHE LAMP THEATRE CORP: $2,000 · Arts & CulturePLANNED PARENTHOOD OF WESTERN PA INC: $6,500 · Health
Other$111,250Food & Nutrition$20,000Recreation & Sports$18,000Animals$9,000Environment$9,000Arts & Culture$8,000Health$6,500

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCROSS ROADS PRESBYTERIAN CH: $30,500 over 8y, 38% of budgetGREATER PITTSBURGH COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEXPERIENCE LEARNING INC: $17,000 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetPITCARE INC: $15,000 over 3y, 2.2% of budgetTAMARACK WILDLIFE CENTER: $8,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF WESTERN PA INC: $6,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetWQED MULTIMEDIA: $6,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetPYMATUNING LAKE ASSOCIATION: $4,000 over 2y, 2.2% of budgetWOMEN'S CENTER AND SHELTER OF GREATER PITTSBURGH: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetALLEGHENY COUNTY PARKS FOUNDATION: $3,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCSU LAW ALUMNI ASSOCIATION: $2,750 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetBROTHER'S BROTHER FOUNDATION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPENNSYLVANIA PARKS AND FORESTS FOUNDATION INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLITERACY PITTSBURGH: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEsperantic Studies Foundation: $2,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetBIKE PITTSBURGH INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetREGIONAL TRAIL CORPORATION: $2,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHE LAMP THEATRE CORP: $2,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPITTSBURGH PARKS CONSERVANCY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY AND CHILDREN'S SERVICE OF PITTSBURGH: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWASHINGTON TRAILS ASSOCIATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSheJumps: $1,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetRAILS TO TRAILS CONSERVANCY: $1,000 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…Katherine Mabis McKen…Richard King Mellon F…The Heinz EndowmentsEqt FoundationAmerican Online Givin…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Pittsburgh FoundationPA16.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Pittsburgh Foundation · Katherine Mabis McKenna Foundation · Richard King Mellon Foundation · The Heinz Endowments · Eqt Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 Leonard C Grasso Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Leonard C Grasso Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s 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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Leonard C Grasso Charitable Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Leonard C Grasso Charitable Foundation 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.

    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 32 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 Leonard C Grasso’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