Skip to content
Pennsylvania Organization for Watersheds and Rivers Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Pennsylvania Organization for Watersheds and Rivers Inc

Pennsylvania organization for watersheds and rivers (powr) provides the tools, training, education and resources that empower community watershed organization leaders and volunteers to protect and restore rivers and streams, advocate for sound water resource management and policies, and facilitate stewardship and enjoyment of…

$100k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$21k
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, FY2019 to 2024.

Environment$173kRecreation & Sports$137kCommunity Improvement$83kArts & Culture$61kHealth$60k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $14k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $89k
$18,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$909k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UPPER DELAWARE PRESERVATION COALITION$21,000
PERKIOMEN WATERSHED$20,000
LACKAWANNA HERITAGE VALLEY$19,750
THE WATERSMITH GUILD INC$18,000
FRIENDS OF HISTORIC HEISHMAN'S MILL$10,472
SCHUYKILL RIVER GREENWAY (2025)$7,000
THE SUSQUEHANNA GREENWAY PARTNERSHIP$7,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 70% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%BRANDYWINE CONSERVANCY: $30k → 6%COUNTY OF BUCKS: $30k → 6%SCHUYKILL RIVER GREENWAY (2025): $7k → 7%LOWER ALLEN TOWNSHIP: $11k → 8%UPPER DELAWARE PRESERVATION COALITION: $21k → 9%GREATER EASTON DEVELOPMENT: $6k → 11%VERONA BOROUGH: $30k → 11%THE SUSQUEHANNA GREENWAY PARTNERSHIP: $7k → 11%MANADA CONSERVANCY: $30k → 12%ENDLESS MOUNTAIN HERITAGE REGION: $13k → 12%SHENANGO RIVER WATCHERS INC: $10k → 13%LACKAWANNA RIVER CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION: $11k → 13%VENANGO BOROUGH: $30k → 14%BOROUGH OF UNION CITY: $20k → 15%CAMBRIA AND SOMERSET COUNTIES: $29k → 16%JOHN BARTAM: $15k → 22%SCHUYLKILL RIVER GREEN: $7k → 7%LOWER ALLEN TOWNSHIP: $11k → 8%UPPER DELAWARE PRESERVATION COALITION: $7k → 9%GREATER EASTON DEVELOPMENT: $6k → 11%VERONA BOROUGH: $30k → 11%LACKAWANNA HERTIAGE VALLEY: $30k → 13%FRENCH CREEK VALLEY CONSERVANCY: $20k → 14%JOHN BARTRAM: $15k → 22%SCHUYLKILL RIVER GREENWAYS ASSOCIATION: $6k → 7%FRIENDS OF HISTORIC HEISHMAN'S MILL: $10k → 8%UPPER DELAWARE PRESERVATION COALITION: $6k → 9%SOUTH FAYETTE TOWNSHIP: $21k → 11%LACKAWANNA HERITAGE VALLEY: $20k → 13%JAMESTOWN LIONS CLUB: $8k → 14%SCHUYLKILL RIVER GRENNWAYS ASSOCIATION: $5k → 7%UPPER DELAWARE PRESERVATION COALITION: $5k → 9%THREE RIVERS WATER KEEPER - 2024 PA ROY: $10k → 11%SCHUYLKILL RIVER GREENWAYS ASSOCIATION: $5k → 7%WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY: $10k → 11%PERKIOMEN WATERSHED: $20k → 7%THE WATERSMITH GUILD INC: $18k → 11%FRIENDS OF THE RIVERFRONT: $10k → 11%FRIENDS OF THE RIVERFRONT: $10k → 11%VENTURE OUTDOORS: $27k → 11%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.

23%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$139k · 4 repeat orgs$478k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +110% since the first grant, against +7% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
19

Total granted

$139k
$423k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+110%
+7%

Still filing today

50%
68%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 46% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $55k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentCommunity ImprovementArts & 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

  • LH
    LACKAWANNA HERITAGE VALLEY AUTHORITY
    2× · 2024–2025 · $50k
  • UD
    UPPER DELAWARE PRESERVATION COALITION
    4× · 2019–2025 · $39k
  • SR
    SCHUYLKILL RIVER GREENWAY ASSOCIATION
    5× · 2019–2025 · $31k · revenue +83%

Funded once

  • VB
    VERONA BOROUGH
    one grant, 2024 · $60k
  • VB
    VENANGO BOROUGH
    one grant, 2022 · $30k
  • BC
    BUCKS COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
    one grant, 2024 · $30k
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
Penns Valley Conservation Association

To serve as a steward for the natural and cultural communities in the upper Penns Creek Watershed. We seek to preserve and Honor the agricultural roots of Penns Valley by protecting and conserving its waters, farmland, forests and rural…

Environment
2
Chalfant Run-Thompson Run Watershed Association

Clean up waterways in the western pa region increase habitat for specific native wildlife

—
3
Bushkill Stream Conservancy

Monitor and improve the flow of the Bushkill Creek in Northampton County PA.

Environment
4
Great Allegheny Passage Conservancy

Founded in 1995 to coordinate the completion of the great allegheny passage, a 150-mile non-motorized path connecting pittsburgh and cumberland, maryland, the great allegheny passage conservancy promotes the great allegheny passage and…

Environment
5
Nanticoke River Watershed Conservan

The organization is a citizen-based land and water conservation advocate dedicated to preservation of open space, plants, and animals, unique, scenic, natural, historical, and recreational sites and objects. these efforts are concentrated…

Environment
6
French and Pickering Creeks Conservation Trust Inc

To preserve, steward, and connect people to the land in northern chester county pennsylvania. see additional information on schedule o.french & pickering is recognized as a leader in regional land conservation, the organization is…

Environment
7
Conemaugh Valley Conservancy Inc

Land/natural resource conservation

Environment
8
Central Pennsylvania Conservancy Inc

The mission of Central Pennsylvania Conservancy (CPC) is to acquire, preserve, and protect local land and natural resources in a five-county, South-Central PA region. Our vision is to create a local network of permanently protected and…

Environment
9
Independence Conservancyinc

Preserving open space by acquisition, easement or deed restriction to protect wildlife habitat, natural and cultural resources, scenic views and quality of life; providing stewardship of watersheds in southwestern pennsylvania through…

Environment
10
Headwaters Resource Conservation and Development Council

The headwaters rc&d council promotes quality of life and economic sustainability by restoring, protecting, and enhancing natural and cultural resources in north central pennsylvania. we do this by providing technical assistance,…

—
11
Essex County Conservation Alliance

Preservation of essex county virginia's rural characteristics, its scenic lands, natural resources, and historic structures.

Environment
12
West Creek Conservancy

Our mission is to enrich the lives of all people in northeast ohio by conserving natural habitats, restoring the ecological value of our region's lands and waters, and expanding opportunities to connect people from all cultures to…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Susquehanna Greenway Partnershp; the most unlike its peers is Lions International Jamestown Lions Club. 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

19 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. 19 of the 27 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/19
Grantees still filing
13/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

VERONA BOROUGH: $60,000 · OtherVERONA BOROUGHLACKAWANNA HERITAGE VALLEY AUTHORITY: $49,750 · OtherLACKAWANNA HERITAGE VALLEY AUTHORITYUPPER DELAWARE PRESERVATION COALITION: $38,890 · OtherUPPER DELAWARE PRESERVATION COALITIONVENANGO BOROUGH: $30,000 · OtherVENANGO BOROUGHBUCKS COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS: $30,000 · OtherBUCKS COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONSTHE JOHN BARTRAM ASSOCIATION: $30,000 · OtherTHE JOHN BARTRAM ASSOCIATIONCAMBRIA AND SOMERSET COUNTIES CONSERVANCY: $28,500 · OtherCAMBRIA AND SOMERSET COUNTIES CONSERVANCYLOWER ALLEN TOWNSHIP: $22,500 · OtherLOWER ALLEN TOWNSHIPSOUTH FAYETTE TOWNSHIP PARKS AND REC: $20,750 · OtherSOUTH FAYETTE TOWNSHIP PARKS AND RECPERKIOMEN WATERSHED CONSERVANCY: $20,000 · OtherPERKIOMEN WATERSHED CONSERVANCYUNION CITY BOROUGH: $20,000 · OtherUNION CITY BOROUGH+1 more: $8,125 · OtherSCHUYLKILL RIVER GREENWAY ASSOCIATION: $30,500 · EnvironmentSCHUYLKILL RIVER GREENWAY ASSOCIATIO…MANADA CONSERVANCY: $30,000 · EnvironmentMANADA CONSERVANCYVENTURE OUTDOORS INC: $26,787 · EnvironmentVENTURE OUTDOORS INCFRENCH CREEK VALLEY CONSERVANCY: $20,000 · EnvironmentFRENCH CREEK VALLEY CONSERVANCYWatersmith Guild Inc: $18,000 · EnvironmentWatersmith Guild IncENDLESS MOUNTAINS HERITAGE REGION: $13,000 · EnvironmentENDLESS MOUNTAINS HERITAGE REGIONLACKAWANNA RIVER CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC: $10,500 · EnvironmentLACKAWANNA RIVER CONSERVATION ASSOCI…FRIENDS OF HISTORIC HEISHMANS MILL: $10,472 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF HISTORIC HEISHMANS MILLSHENANGO RIVER WATCHERS INC: $10,000 · EnvironmentTHREE RIVERS WATERKEEPER: $10,000 · EnvironmentWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY: $10,000 · EnvironmentTHE SUSQUEHANNA GREENWAY PARTNERSHP: $7,000 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF THE RIVERFRONT INC: $20,000 · Community ImprovementGreater Easton Development Partnership: $12,376 · Community ImprovementBrandywine Conservancy & Museum of Art: $30,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$358,515Environment$196,259Community Improvement$32,376Arts & Culture$30,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSCHUYLKILL RIVER GREENWAY ASSOCIATION: $30,500 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetTHE JOHN BARTRAM ASSOCIATION: $30,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetBrandywine Conservancy & Museum of Art: $30,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMANADA CONSERVANCY: $30,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetCAMBRIA AND SOMERSET COUNTIES CONSERVANCY: $28,500 over 1y, 53% of budgetVENTURE OUTDOORS INC: $26,787 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE RIVERFRONT INC: $20,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetFRENCH CREEK VALLEY CONSERVANCY: $20,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetENDLESS MOUNTAINS HERITAGE REGION: $13,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetGreater Easton Development Partnership: $12,376 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetLACKAWANNA RIVER CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC: $10,500 over 1y, 7.6% of budgetFRIENDS OF HISTORIC HEISHMANS MILL: $10,472 over 1y, 34% of budgetSHENANGO RIVER WATCHERS INC: $10,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetTHREE RIVERS WATERKEEPER: $10,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLIONS INTERNATIONAL JAMESTOWN LIONS CLUB: $8,125 over 1y, 8.5% 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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Pennsylvania Environm…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Pennsylvania Environmental Council IncPA15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Pennsylvania Environmental Council Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Pennsylvania Organization for Watersheds and Rivers Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Pennsylvania Organization for Watersheds and Rivers Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    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 Pennsylvania Organization for Watersheds and Rivers Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Pennsylvania Organization for Watersheds and Rivers Inc 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 27 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Pennsylvania Organization for Watersheds and Rivers’ 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