Skip to content
Michael J Mooney Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Michael J Mooney Charitable Trust

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$13k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$8k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0187% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2025.

Education$18kRecreation & Sports$15kReligion$11kHealth$11kAnimals$6kHuman Services$4kCrime & Legal$3kArts & Culture$1kOther$0
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$270k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Step Inc$8,000
YMCA$1,000
St Nicholas Church$1,000
Sidney Phyllis Krystal Foundation$1,000
Osterhout Free Library$1,000
Judy Patte Memorial Golf Tournament$1,000
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 (FY21–25, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, 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%HOSPICE OF THE SACRED HEART: $500 → 13%YMCA: $1k → 15%YMCA: $1k → 15%YMCA: $1k → 15%YMCA: $1k → 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.

74%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$69k · 13 repeat orgs$24k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +28% since the first grant, against +2% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
15

Total granted

$69k
$24k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+28%
+2%

Still filing today

38%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

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

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

’21’22’23’24’25
HealthEducationHuman 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

  • VI
    VOLUNTEERS IN MEDICINE
    5× · 2021–2025 · $7k · revenue +35%
  • YO
    YMCA OF THE ROSES
    4× · 2022–2025 · $4k · revenue +29%
  • OF
    OSTERHOUT FREE LIBRARY
    4× · 2021–2025 · $3k · revenue +17%

Funded once

  • BC
    Blue Chip Farm Animal Refuge
    3× · 2023–2025 · $3k
  • CA
    CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER
    one grant, 2021 · $3k
  • CR
    COLONEL RONALD M SHARPE SCHOLARSHIP - WEST CHESTER UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2021 · $3k
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
Philadelphia Health Partnership
Health
2
Northeastern Pennsylvania Health Care Foundation
Education
3
Shadyside Hospital of Pittsburgh
—
4
Pennsylvania Medical Society

The pennsylvania medical society is the voice of pennsylvania's physicians and the patients they serve. we advance quality patient care and the ethical practice of medicine. we promote physician leadership, education, professional…

—
5
Pennsylvania Polio Survivors Network
Health
6
Keystone Hospice

Providing comprehensive home-based and facility based hospice care to children and adults with life limiting and life threatening illnesses in southeastern pennsylvania. in addition, keystone hospice provides residential care through…

Human Services
7
The Sir Philip Sidney Foundation
Philanthropy
8
Physicians for Palestine
Health
9
Upmc Pinnacle Hospitals

Upmc pinnacle hospitals mission as a charitable organization is dedicatied to maintaining and improving the health and quality of life for all persons of the central pennsylvania area.

Health
10
The Frederick a Simeone Md Foundation Inc
Arts & Culture
11
Hoyt Library

The hoyt library is a public free library located in kingston, pa. it was established as a nonsectarian library with reading and writing rooms suitable to the needs of the citizens in kingston and surrounding vicinity.

Education
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is King's College; the most unlike its peers is Sidney & Phyllis Krystal Foundation. 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

11 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. 11 of the 28 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Step Inc: $17,000 · OtherStep IncLycoming Co Camp Cadet: $12,000 · OtherLycoming Co Camp CadetSt Nicholas Church: $7,300 · OtherSt Nicholas ChurchIndividual grant recipient: $3,600 · OtherIndividual grant recipientBlue Chip Farm Animal Refuge: $3,000 · OtherCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER: $3,000 · OtherJudy Patte Memorial Golf Tournament: $3,000 · OtherOSTERHOUT FREE LIBRARY: $3,000 · OtherCOLONEL RONALD M SHARPE SCHOLARSHIP - WEST CHESTER UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $3,000 · OtherWB Friendly Sons of St Patrick: $3,000 · OtherFRIENDLY SONS OF ST PATRICK SCHOLARSHIP WILKES BARRE: $2,250 · Other+7 more: $5,700 · Other+7 moreVOLUNTEERS IN MEDICINE: $7,000 · HealthVOLUNTEERS IN M…AMERICAN PARKINSON DISEASE ASSOC: $2,000 · HealthAMERICAN PARKIN…WYOMING VALLEY CHILDREN'S ASSOCIATION: $2,000 · HealthWYOMING VALLEY …American Diabetes Association: $1,250 · HealthAmerican Diabet…SIDNEY & PHYLLIS KRYSTAL FOUNDATION: $3,900 · EducationKING'S COLLEGE: $2,000 · EducationYMCA OF THE ROSES: $4,000 · Human ServicesHOSPICE OF THE SACRED HEART: $500 · Human ServicesTHE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS OF LUZERNE COUNTY: $2,500 · AnimalsPENNSYLVANIA STATE POLICE HISTORICAL EDUCATIONAL & MEMORIAL: $1,400 · Arts & Culture
Other$65,850Health$12,250Education$5,900Human Services$4,500Animals$2,500Arts & Culture$1,400

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 budgetVOLUNTEERS IN MEDICINE: $7,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetYMCA OF THE ROSES: $4,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetSIDNEY & PHYLLIS KRYSTAL FOUNDATION: $3,900 over 5y, 5.8% of budgetOSTERHOUT FREE LIBRARY: $3,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTHE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS OF LUZERNE COUNTY: $2,500 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetKING'S COLLEGE: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN PARKINSON DISEASE ASSOC: $2,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetWYOMING VALLEY CHILDREN'S ASSOCIATION: $2,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetPENNSYLVANIA STATE POLICE HISTORICAL EDUCATIONAL & MEMORIAL: $1,400 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetAmerican Diabetes Association: $1,250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHOSPICE OF THE SACRED HEART: $500 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.

  • Who funds VOLUNTEERS IN MEDICINE ↗
  • Who funds YMCA OF THE ROSES ↗
  • Who funds SIDNEY & PHYLLIS KRYSTAL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds OSTERHOUT FREE LIBRARY ↗
  • Who funds THE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS OF LUZERNE COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds KING'S COLLEGE ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN PARKINSON DISEASE ASSOC ↗
  • Who funds WYOMING VALLEY CHILDREN'S ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds PENNSYLVANIA STATE POLICE HISTORICAL EDUCATIONAL & MEMORIAL ↗
  • Who funds American Diabetes Association ↗
  • Who funds HOSPICE OF THE SACRED HEART ↗

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…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Tambur Family FoundationPA13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Tambur Family Foundation · 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 Michael J Mooney Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Michael J Mooney Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%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 · 0–75%
    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 28 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 Michael J Mooney’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