Skip to content
Mohawk Valley Library System at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Mohawk Valley Library System

The system provides support services, materials and grants to improve and enhance member library services

$367k
Granted FY2024still arriving
9
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$103k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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.

Education$1.6MArts & Culture$61k
02FY2024 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $351,676, the rows itemized in this filing. The $366,666 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $14,990 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k7 grants · $163k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $189k
$22,995
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SCHENECTADY COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY$102,718
AMSTERDAM FREE LIBRARY$86,067
CANAJOHARIE LIBRARY & ART GALLERY$44,226
GLOVERSVILLE PUBLIC LIBRARY$28,285
FORT PLAIN FREE LIBRARY$22,995
THE COMMUNITY LIBRARY$21,183
SCHOHARIE FREE LIBRARY$16,229
MIDDLEBURGH LIBRARY$15,163
SHARON SPRINGS FREE LIBRARY$14,810
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 89% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%SHARON SPRINGS FREE LIBRARY: $15k → 10%NORTHVILLE PUB LIBRARY: $6k → 11%SCHENECTADY COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY: $163k → 12%GLOVERSVILLE PUBLIC LIBRARY: $28k → 13%FORT HUNTER FREE LIBRARY: $7k → 14%SCHOHARIE FREE LIBRARY: $16k → 10%NORTHVILLE PUB LIBRARY: $6k → 11%SCHENECTADY COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY: $163k → 12%GLOVERSVILLE PUBLIC LIBRARY: $22k → 13%AMSTERDAM FREE LIBRARY: $86k → 14%SHARON SPRINGS FREE LIBRARY: $6k → 10%SCHENECTADY COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY: $160k → 12%GLOVERSVILLE PUBLIC LIBRARY: $13k → 13%AMSTERDAM FREE LIBRARY: $21k → 14%SCHOHARIE FREE LIBRARY: $5k → 10%SCHENECTADY COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY: $146k → 12%GLOVERSVILLE PUBLIC LIBRARY: $12k → 13%AMSTERDAM FREE LIBRARY: $12k → 14%MIDDLEBURGH LIBRARY: $15k → 10%SCHENECTADY COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY: $145k → 12%GLOVERSVILLE PUBLIC LIBRARY: $10k → 13%AMSTERDAM FREE LIBRARY: $11k → 14%MIDDLEBURGH LIBRARY: $6k → 10%SCHENECTADY COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY: $122k → 12%GLOVERSVILLE PUBLIC LIBRARY: $8k → 13%AMSTERDAM FREE LIBRARY: $10k → 14%THE COMMUNITY LIBRARY: $33k → 10%SCHENECTADY COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY: $103k → 12%GLOVERSVILLE PUBLIC LIBRARY: $7k → 13%AMSTERDAM FREE LIBRARY: $8k → 14%THE COMMUNITY LIBRARY: $21k → 10%SCHENECTADY COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY: $95k → 12%JOHNSTOWN PUBLIC LIBRARY: $12k → 13%AMSTERDAM FREE LIBRARY: $8k → 14%THE COMMUNITY LIBRARY: $20k → 10%JOHNSTOWN PUBLIC LIBRARY: $11k → 13%THE COMMUNITY LIBRARY: $8k → 10%JOHNSTOWN PUBLIC LIBRARY: $6k → 13%FROTHINGHAM FREE LIB: $8k → 14%THE COMMUNITY LIBRARY: $8k → 10%MARGARET REANEY MEMORIAL LIBRARY: $7k → 13%THE COMMUNITY LIBRARY: $7k → 10%FORT PLAIN FREE LIBRARY: $23k → 14%THE COMMUNITY LIBRARY: $6k → 10%FORT PLAIN FREE LIBRARY: $7k → 14%CANAJOHARIE LIBRARY & ART GALLERY: $44k → 14%CANAJOHARIE LIBRARY & ART GALLERY: $10k → 14%CANAJOHARIE LIBRARY & ART GALLERY: $7k → 14%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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.7M · 12 repeat orgs$14k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +20% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
2

Total granted

$1.7M
$14k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+20%
0%

Still filing today

83%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EducationArts & 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

  • AF
    AMSTERDAM FREE LIBRARY
    8× · 2017–2024 · $161k · revenue +269%
  • TC
    THE COMMUNITY LIBRARY
    7× · 2017–2024 · $103k · revenue +222%
  • SF
    Schoharie Free Library Assocation
    2× · 2021–2024 · $22k · revenue +55%

Funded once

  • MR
    MARGARET REANEY MEMORIAL LIBRARY
    one grant, 2018 · $7k · revenue -11%
  • FH
    FORT HUNTER FREE LIBRARY
    one grant, 2018 · $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
Parkesburg Free Library

The mission of the Parkesburg Free Library is to provide the Parkesburg Borough and surrounding communities with book materials and information necessary for personal growth and life long learning. We seek to guide community and business…

—
2
New Ipswich Library
—
3
Morris Plains Library Association

Public Library providing books and computer network to the public

Education
4
Riverton Free Library Association
—
5
Mountain Lakes Free Public Library

The mission of the Mountain Lakes Free Public Library is to provide free access to books, periodicals, magazines, audio, video, digital and internet media

Education
6
Odell Nebraska Public Library
Education
7
William B Ogden Free Library

To provide library services to local area residents.

Education
8
Simsbury Free Library
Education
9
Lillie Russell Memorial Library

None

Education
10
Field Memorial Library
—
11
North Smithfield Public Library

Public library providing access to a wide variety of materials and services to the community

Education
12
Monessen Public Library

Monessen Public Library provides collection facilities and services to the people of the Monessen community, which assists them in fulfilling their need for information, research sources, and cultural enrichment.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Fort Plain Free Library; the most unlike its peers is Margaret Reaney Memorial Library. 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 14 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/13
Grantees still filing
7/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SCHENECTADY COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY: $1,097,871 · OtherSCHENECTADY COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARYAMSTERDAM FREE LIBRARY: $161,167 · OtherAMSTERDAM FREE LIBRARYCANAJOHARIE LIBRARY & ART GALLERY: $61,262 · Other+3 more: $53,136 · OtherTHE COMMUNITY LIBRARY: $103,278 · EducationTHE COMMUNITY LIBRA…GLOVERSVILLE PUBLIC LIBRARY: $98,764 · EducationGLOVERSVILLE PUBLIC…Fort Plain Free Library: $35,157 · EducationFort Plain Free Lib…Schoharie Free Library Assocation: $21,709 · EducationSchoharie Free Libr…Middleburgh Library Association: $20,680 · EducationMiddleburgh Library…+2 more: $13,836 · EducationSharon Springs Free Library: $20,801 · Arts & Culture
Other$1,373,436Education$293,424Arts & Culture$20,801

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetAMSTERDAM FREE LIBRARY: $161,167 over 8y, 6.5% of budgetTHE COMMUNITY LIBRARY: $103,278 over 7y, 9.5% of budgetGLOVERSVILLE PUBLIC LIBRARY: $98,764 over 7y, 2.6% of budgetCANAJOHARIE LIBRARY & ART GALLERY: $61,262 over 3y, 6.5% of budgetFort Plain Free Library: $35,157 over 3y, 9.6% of budgetJOHNSTOWN PUBLIC LIBRARY: $28,454 over 3y, 3.0% of budgetSchoharie Free Library Assocation: $21,709 over 2y, 7.9% of budgetSharon Springs Free Library: $20,801 over 2y, 15% of budgetMiddleburgh Library Association: $20,680 over 2y, 5.6% of budgetNORTHVILLE PUBLIC LIBRARY: $11,737 over 2y, 3.8% of budgetMARGARET REANEY MEMORIAL LIBRARY: $6,918 over 1y, 5.4% 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile Foundation
Amazonsmile FoundationWA1.6× affinity7 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Mohawk Valley Library System funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Mohawk Valley Library System. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 Mohawk Valley Library System?

    Find your warmest path to Mohawk Valley Library System 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 14 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Mohawk Valley Library System’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