How much did ONEPGH FUND grant in FY2023?

Human Services$288kCommunity Improvement$88kYouth Development$41kEnvironment$34kPhilanthropy$29kEmployment$12kHealth$10kInternational$10kPublic Benefit$6kOther$120k

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2018

economic workingworking group

2021

hazelwood greenway

2023

—

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2023 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2023

$10k–50k3 grants · $59k
$50k–250k3 grants · $258k

$53,050

Median grant

States reached

$474k

Total assets

Largest grants

LANDFORCE$135,000
STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION$70,092
CHARLES STREET AREA COUNCIL$53,050
GOATSCAPE$24,450
COMMUNITY FOUNDATION FOR THE ALLEGH$24,350
TREE PITTSBURGH$10,000

02The need

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–23, $288k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11% — the area typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge

repeat funding

Who you back again

Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.

40%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$257k · 3 repeat orgs$381k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +185% since the first grant, against +30% for the ones you funded once.

3 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2023, 2 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$257k

$200k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+185%

+30%

Still filing today

100%

96%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 43% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $182k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Human ServicesCommunity ImprovementYouth DevelopmentEmploymentHealthInternationalOther

First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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

L
Landforce
2× · 2021–2023 · $175k · revenue +344%
NS
NEW SUN RISING
2× · 2017–2018 · $72k · revenue +69%
HI
Hazelwood Initiative Inc
2× · 2018–2021 · $10k · revenue +185%

Funded once

YG
YMCA GREATER PITTSBURGH
one grant, 2017 · $16k · revenue -25%
BA
BROTHERS AND SISTERS EMERGING
one grant, 2017 · $16k · revenue +25%
CO
CENTER OF LIFEgraduated
one grant, 2017 · $15k · revenue +162%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

Sustainable Pittsburgh

To empower decision-making that builds a fundamentally equitable, resilient, healthy and propsperous region.

Environment

Pittsburgh Community Broadcasting

To create and distribute trusted content, build connections and strengthen our community through public media.

Arts & Culture

Pittsburgh Community Reinvestment G

PCRG is a coalition of community leaders working for economic justice, equitable investment practices and sufficient financial resources to revitalize communities throughout Allegheny County, PA

Community Improvement

World Affairs Council of Pittsburgh

To convene and connect people around global issues to build a competitive, thriving, and inclusive pittsburgh.

International

GlobalPittsburgh

GlobalPittsburgh is a nonprofit organization with a mission to forge cultural, educational, and business relationships between Western Pennsylvania and the global community through citizen diplomacy.

Community Improvement

Scenic Pittsburgh

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

Environment

Community Action Commission

Community action commission's mission is to build on the strengths and resources available, provide solutions for complex issues, and empower individuals, families, and communities to move out of poverty.

Human Services

Pittsburgh Community Services Inc

Provide programs to help individuals and/or families achieve self-sufficiency

Human Services

Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy

Improve quality of life by enhancing pittsburgh's parks in partnership with the community.

Recreation & Sports

Pittsburgh Council On Higher Education

To provide a means for sharing resources and information among members, engage in joint projects, and offer a common voice on educational matters.

Education

Pittsburgh Venture Capital Association

The pittsburgh venture capital association was founded in 1982 to catalyze venture investment and entrepreneurialism in western pennsylvania. since then it has become the leading voice of private equity investors in the region.through a…

—

Pittsburgh Technology Council

To help technology companies succeed through business development and talent retention services.

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is North Hills Community Outreach Inc and the most unlike its peers is Young Men's Christian Association. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 27 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 16% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 7% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/35

the rest of the field

644/9,871

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

05the grantee network

34 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

34/34

Grantees still filing

28/34

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Human Services$287,700Other$146,092Community Improvement$88,050Youth Development$41,000Environment$34,450Philanthropy$29,350Employment$12,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them

A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

The Pittsburgh FoundationPA53.8× affinity27 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Pittsburgh Foundation · Hillman Family Foundations · The Heinz Endowments · Richard King Mellon Foundation · The United Way of Southwestern · The Grable Foundation · Jefferson Regional Foundation · McElhattan Foundation · Community Foundation of Greater · Upmc Group · Howard & Nell E Miller Foundat · Solomon Mendel & Sylvia Charitable Trust

Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organisation ONEPGH FUND funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

0get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. An association, not a claim that your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: WILL ALLEN FOUNDATION.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~11 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 8 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

8 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 14.2× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 472025476 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on WILL ALLEN FOUNDATION, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 11 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 26% of their budget — diversified.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Onepgh Fund?

Find your warmest path to Onepgh Fund through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

ONEPGH FUND

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

34 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Onepgh Fund?

More from the funding graph

ONEPGH FUND

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

34 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Onepgh Fund?

More from the funding graph