Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Pennsylvania Downtown Center Inc

To build and support the capacity of local non-profit organizations, municipalities, and individuals to enhance the well-being and sustainability of pennsylvania's historic boroughs, towns, and cities.

$682k
Granted FY2025still arriving
27
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$35k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20222025.

Public Benefit$795kCommunity Improvement$306kHousing & Shelter$161kHuman Services$37k
02FY2025 · 27 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $9k
  • $10k–50k26 grants · $668k
$25,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CITY OF EASTON$35,000
CITY OF ALLENTOWN$35,000
CITY OF PITTSTON$34,860
CITY OF MEADVILLE$30,000
BOROUGH OF VANDERGRIFT$30,000
BOROUGH OF WILKINSBURG$30,000
SWISSVALE BOROUGH$29,995
BELLEVUE BOROUGH$29,550
CARBON CHAMBER & ECONOMIC DEV CORP$25,000
SUNBURY'S REVITALIZATION INC$25,000
CENTRO HISPANO DANIEL TORRES INC$25,000
NEIGHBORWORKS NORTHEASTERN PA$25,000
GRTR WHITE HAVEN CHAMBER OF COMMERC$25,000
ALLENTOWN HOUSING AUTHORITY$25,000
GRTR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORP$25,000
02The need
03

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 (FY24–25, $74k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%CENTRO HISPANO DANIEL TORRES INC: $25k → 11%CENTRO HISPANO DANIEL TORRES INC: $12k → 11%LATINO CONNECTION FOUNDATION: $25k → 12%LATINO CONNECTION FOUNDATION: $12k → 12%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 linein 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 — 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.

31%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$405k · 11 repeat orgs$893k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of 0% since the first grant, against -16% for the ones you funded once.

11 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 17 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
24

Total granted

$405k
$466k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
-16%

Still filing today

82%
17%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 37% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $427k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
Community ImprovementHousing & ShelterHuman ServicesEnvironmentArts & CultureOther

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

  • CC
    CARBON CHAMBER AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
    2× · 2024–2025 · $37k · revenue 0%
  • SN
    SCRANTON NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $37k · revenue -18%
  • CI
    CEIBA INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $37k · revenue -2%

Funded once

  • BO
    BOROUGH OF OXFORD
    one grant, 2024 · $35k
  • BT
    BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP
    one grant, 2024 · $33k
  • VB
    VERONA BOROUGH
    one grant, 2023 · $28k

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.

1
Craig Chamber of Commerce

Improve the economy of the local community

2
Covation Center Inc

To energize rural pennsylvania, enabling all citizens to innovate, create, and manufacture, building a lasting economy

Employment
3
Center for Community Revitalization
Human Services
4
Canton Regional Chamber of Commerce Foundation Inc

Economic & community development - restore and maintain healthy economic and social conditions in the city of canton and stark county and to support infrastructure expansion vital to economic growth.

5
Lewisburg Neighborhoods Corporation

Revitalization of various neighborhoods in lewisburg, pa

Arts & Culture
6
Frankfort Area Chamber of Commerce

Building a vibrant economy through member driven advocacy & community leadership

7
Clarinda Chamber of Commerce

City and area economic development

8
Corry Community Development Corporation dba Impact Corry

Strategic community initiatives.

Recreation & Sports
9
Cabarrus Economic Development Inc

Community economic development

10
The Midtown Community Development Foundation
Philanthropy
11
Clevelandbradley Chamber of Commerce

Business development of members, economic growth of the region, and the highest quality of life for the ocoee region of tennessee.

12
Whitehall Community Improvement Co

To present the community to the public in an engaging manner so that the commumity and all residents take pride in the growth of the city into a maturing community.

Community Improvement

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Greater Community Development Corp and the most unlike its peers is Sunburys Revitalization Inc. 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 one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 13 of the 52 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
2/13
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

ALLENTOWN HOUSING AUTHORITY — $37,000 · OtherCITY OF EASTON — $35,000 · OtherBOROUGH OF OXFORD — $35,000 · OtherCITY OF ALLENTOWN — $35,000 · OtherCITY OF PITTSTON — $34,860 · OtherBOROUGH OF FOREST HILLS — $34,851 · OtherBETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP — $33,000 · Other+32 more — $663,005 · Other+32 moreCARBON CHAMBER AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION — $37,000 · Community ImprovementCARBON CHAMBER …CEIBA INC — $37,000 · Community ImprovementCEIBA INCGREATER WHITE HAVEN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE — $37,000 · Community ImprovementGREATER WHITE H…GREATER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORP — $37,000 · Community ImprovementGREATER COMMUNI…CLARION BLUEPRINT COMMUNITY INC — $12,500 · Community ImprovementCLARION BLUEPRI…NEW VISIONS FOR NEW CASTLE — $12,500 · Community ImprovementNEW VISIONS FOR…SCRANTON NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES INC — $37,000 · Housing & ShelterCOMMUNITY STRATEGIES GROUP — $37,000 · Housing & ShelterCENTER FOR COMMUNITY ACTION — $12,500 · Housing & ShelterCENTRO HISPANO DANIEL TORRES INC — $37,000 · Human ServicesLATINO CONNECTION FOUNDATION — $37,000 · Human ServicesSUNBURYS REVITALIZATION INC — $37,000 · EnvironmentQUAKERTOWN ALIVE — $19,999 · Arts & Culture
Other$907,716Community Improvement$173,000Housing & Shelter$86,500Human Services$74,000Environment$37,000Arts & Culture$19,999

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetCARBON CHAMBER AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION — $37,000 over 2y, 3.5% of budgetSCRANTON NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES INC — $37,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetCEIBA INC — $37,000 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetGREATER WHITE HAVEN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE — $37,000 over 2y, 46% of budgetCENTRO HISPANO DANIEL TORRES INC — $37,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetCOMMUNITY STRATEGIES GROUP — $37,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetLATINO CONNECTION FOUNDATION — $37,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetGREATER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORP — $37,000 over 2y, 3.4% of budgetSUNBURYS REVITALIZATION INC — $37,000 over 2y, 4.5% of budgetQUAKERTOWN ALIVE — $19,999 over 1y, 11% of budgetCLARION BLUEPRINT COMMUNITY INC — $12,500 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetNEW VISIONS FOR NEW CASTLE — $12,500 over 1y, 6.5% of budgetCENTER FOR COMMUNITY ACTION — $12,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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.

  • Who funds CARBON CHAMBER AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
  • Who funds SCRANTON NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES INC
  • Who funds CEIBA INC
  • Who funds GREATER WHITE HAVEN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • Who funds CENTRO HISPANO DANIEL TORRES INC
  • Who funds COMMUNITY STRATEGIES GROUP
  • Who funds LATINO CONNECTION FOUNDATION
  • Who funds GREATER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORP
  • Who funds SUNBURYS REVITALIZATION INC
  • Who funds QUAKERTOWN ALIVE

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.

Amazonsmile FoundationWA0.4× affinity5 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Amazonsmile Foundation

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 organization Pennsylvania Downtown Center Inc 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
202122232425
no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%your 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
    5report 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, FY2025

    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 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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 52 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph