Skip to content
Metz Family Foundation Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

Metz Family Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$186k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Science & Tech$500kHealth$332kEducation$251kArts & Culture$34kCrime & Legal$5kPublic Safety & Disaster$4kFood & Nutrition$3kEnvironment$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k7 grants · $3k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $183k
$500
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GEISINGER HEALTH FOUNDATION$100,000
CULINARY INSTITUTE OF AMERICA$83,333
WYOMING VALLEY CHILDRENS ASSOC$500
HARVEYS LAKE FIRE DEPARTMENT$500
VICTIMS RESOURCE CENTER$500
CANCER WELLNESS CENTER$350
NORTHEAST SIGHT SERVICES$350
COFFEE INCLUSIVE$300
BLUE CHIP ANIMAL REFUGE$300
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 (FY17–25, $30k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 92% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%PARC CENTER FOR DISABILITIES: $20k → 12%HARVEST HOUSE: $3k → 9%NORTHEAST SIGHT SERVICES: $350 → 15%CANDYS PLACE: $350 → 15%CANDYS PLACE: $350 → 15%CANDYS PLACE: $350 → 15%CANDYS PLACE: $350 → 15%CANDYS PLACE: $350 → 15%CANDYS PLACE: $350 → 15%CANDYS PLACE: $350 → 15%VICTIMS RESOURCE CENTER: $1k → 15%VICTIMS RESOURCE CENTER: $500 → 15%VICTIMS RESOURCE CENTER: $500 → 15%VICTIMS RESOURCE CENTER: $500 → 15%VICTIMS RESOURCE CENTER: $500 → 15%VICTIMS RESOURCE CENTER: $500 → 15%VICTIMS RESOURCE CENTER: $500 → 15%VICTIMS RESOURCE CENTER: $300 → 15%VICTIMS RESOURCE CENTER: $200 → 15%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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$967k · 12 repeat orgs$67k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +5% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
7

Total granted

$967k
$65k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+5%
0%

Still filing today

67%
29%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k 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
Human ServicesHealthEducationEnvironmentAnimalsOther
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

  • CULINARY INSTITUTE OF AMERICA
    2× · 2024–2025 · $167k · revenue +5%
  • MU
    MISERICORDIA UNIVERSITY
    5× · 2018–2022 · $28k · revenue +40%
  • WV
    WYOMING VALLEY CHILDREN'S ASSOCIATION
    8× · 2018–2025 · $5k · revenue +86%

Funded once

  • RC
    RINGLING COLLEGE OF ART
    one grant, 2017 · $33k
  • PI
    PARC INC
    one grant, 2024 · $20k · revenue 0%
  • MU
    MISERCORIDA UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2024 · $7k
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
Delaware Valley University

See schedule o.we are inspired by the ideals of our founder who, in 1896, emphasized respect for all people and ideas, who honored knowledge with practice, progress and the common good. our historical commitment to experiential learning…

—
2
Gettysburg College

Gettysburg college is a residential, undergraduate college of the liberal arts and sciences.

Education
3
Wilson College

Wilson college empowers students to be confident and critical thinkers, creative visionaries, effective communicators, honorable leaders, and agents of justice.

Education
4
Saint Joseph's University

As philadelphia's jesuit catholic university, saint joseph's provides a rigorous, student-centered education rooted in the liberal arts. we prepare students for personal excellence, professional success, and engaged citizenship. striving…

Education
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
Monmouth University Inc

See schedule omonmouth university is a comprehensive institution of higher education committed to excellence and integrity in teaching, scholarship and service. through its offerings in liberal arts, sciences, and professional programs,…

Education
7
Penn State Health Hampden Medical Center

Penn state health hampden medical center's mission is to continually improve the health and well-being of the people in pennsylvania. the organization provides patients with excellent, compassionate and culturally responsive and equitable…

Health
8
Penn State Health

Penn state health's mission is to continually improve the health and well-being of the people of pennsylvania, and beyond. the organization provides patients with excellent, compassionate and equitable care; educates and trains (continued…

Health
9
Fairleigh Dickinson University

Fairleigh dickinson university is a center of academic excellence dedicated to the preparation of world citizens through global education. the university strives to provide students with the multi-disciplinary, intercultural, and ethical…

Education
10
Philhaven

Philhaven promotes hope, healing and wholeness through the provision of behavioral resources.

Health
11
Geneva College

Geneva college is a christ-centered academic community that provides a comprehensive education to equip students for faithful and fruitful service to god and neighbor.

Education
12
Geisinger Wyoming Valley Medical Center

Strive to make better health easier by providing access to affordable, high quality health services through equitable, innovative, and inclusive care models that support patient care, education, research, & community service.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Luzerne Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Hillsdale College. 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

15 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. 15 of the 26 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)
15/15
Grantees still filing
8/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MARINE LABORATORY AND AQUARIUM: $500,000 · OtherMARINE LABORATORY AND AQUARIUMIndividual grant recipient: $50,200 · OtherIndividual grant recipientRINGLING COLLEGE OF ART: $33,333 · OtherRINGLING COLLEGE OF ART+9 more: $17,600 · OtherGEISINGER HEALTH: $200,000 · HealthGEISINGER HEALTHMAYO CLINIC: $100,000 · HealthMAYO CLINIC+1 more: $4,500 · HealthCULINARY INSTITUTE OF AMERICA: $166,666 · EducationCULINARY INSTITUTE OF A…HILLSDALE COLLEGE: $50,000 · EducationHILLSDALE COLLEGEMISERICORDIA UNIVERSITY: $27,500 · EducationMISERICORDIA UNIVERSITY+1 more: $2,000 · EducationPARC INC: $20,000 · Human ServicesVICTIMS RESOURCE CENTER: $4,500 · Human ServicesHARVEST HOUSE INC: $2,500 · Human ServicesTHE CANCER WELLNESS CENTER OF NEPA: $2,450 · Human Services+1 more: $350 · Human ServicesNORTH BRANCH LAND TRUST: $2,300 · EnvironmentTHE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS OF LUZERNE COUNTY: $1,800 · Animals
Other$601,133Health$304,500Education$246,166Human Services$29,800Environment$2,300Animals$1,800

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 budgetGEISINGER HEALTH: $200,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCULINARY INSTITUTE OF AMERICA: $166,666 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMAYO CLINIC: $100,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHILLSDALE COLLEGE: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMISERICORDIA UNIVERSITY: $27,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetPARC INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWYOMING VALLEY CHILDREN'S ASSOCIATION: $4,500 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetVICTIMS RESOURCE CENTER: $4,500 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetHARVEST HOUSE INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetTHE CANCER WELLNESS CENTER OF NEPA: $2,450 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetNORTH BRANCH LAND TRUST: $2,300 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetTHE LUZERNE FOUNDATION: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS OF LUZERNE COUNTY: $1,800 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetCOFFEE INCLUSIVE: $300 over 1y, 0.1% 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 GEISINGER HEALTH ↗
  • Who funds CULINARY INSTITUTE OF AMERICA ↗
  • Who funds MAYO CLINIC ↗
  • Who funds HILLSDALE COLLEGE ↗
  • Who funds MISERICORDIA UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds PARC INC ↗
  • Who funds WYOMING VALLEY CHILDREN'S ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds VICTIMS RESOURCE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds HARVEST HOUSE INC ↗
  • Who funds THE CANCER WELLNESS CENTER OF NEPA ↗
  • Who funds NORTH BRANCH LAND TRUST ↗
  • Who funds THE LUZERNE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS OF LUZERNE COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds GREATER WILKES BARRE ASSOCIATION FOR THE BLIND D/B/A NORTHEAST SIGHT SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds COFFEE INCLUSIVE ↗

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 Tambur Family Fou…Benco Family Foundati…Maslow Family Foundat…William G McGowan Cha…Hackett Philanthropie…Moses Taylor Foundati…Allone CharitiesThe Luzerne FoundationWyoming Valley Health…Benevento and Mayo Fo…Joseph and Erma Pagli…Allone Foundation
The Tambur Family FoundationPA20× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Tambur Family Foundation · Benco Family Foundation Fka Cohen Family Charitable Foundation · Maslow Family Foundation Inc · William G McGowan Charitable Fund · Hackett Philanthropies Foundation · Moses Taylor Foundation Inc · Allone Charities · The Luzerne Foundation · Wyoming Valley Health & Education Foundation · Benevento and Mayo Foundation · Joseph and Erma Paglianite Charitable Foundation · Allone 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 Metz Family Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Metz Family Foundation Inc. 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%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Parc Inc: 2% of income from government
  • Harvest House Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
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 26 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 Metz 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