Skip to content
Pennsylvania's State System of Higher Education Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Pennsylvania's State System of Higher Education Foundation

To support the educational mission and activities of pennsylvania's state system of higher education (state system) by generating private sector financial support and engaging in other activities to advance the state system.

$2.5M
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$35k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2025.

Education$1.2MArts & Culture$30kEmployment$25kHealth$6k
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 5 grants below total $155,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $2,539,060 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $2,384,060 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.
$30,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$11M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHEYNEY UNIVERSITY$35,000
SHIPPENSBURG UNIVERSITY$30,000
EAST STROUODSBURG$30,000
SLIPPERY ROCK UNIVERSITY$30,000
COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY$30,000
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 97% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%SHIPPENSBURG UNIVERSITY: $30k → 8%SLIPPERY ROCK UNIVERSITY: $30k → 9%MILLERSVILLE UNIVERSITY: $88k → 9%CHEYNEY UNIVERSITY: $35k → 10%UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH: $31k → 11%CALIFORNIA UNIVERSITY OF PA: $6k → 12%MANSFIELD UNIVERSITY: $56k → 12%EAST STROUODSBURG: $30k → 12%OFFICE OF THE CHANCELLOR: $25k → 12%COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY: $30k → 14%WWFTF: $316k → 11%SHIPPENSBURG UNIVERSITY: $10k → 8%SLIPPERY ROCK UNIVERSITY: $10k → 9%MILLERSVILLE UNIVERSITY: $23k → 9%CHEYNEY UNIVERSITY OF PA: $20k → 10%EAST STROUDSBURG UNIVERSITY: $10k → 12%PASSHE: $6k → 12%COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY: $10k → 14%WWFTF: $155k → 11%CHEYNEY UNIVERSITY OF PA: $20k → 10%WOODROW WILSON FTF: $130k → 11%CHEYNEY UNIVERSITY OF PA: $20k → 10%WOODROW WILSON FTF: $125k → 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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.1M · 7 repeat orgs$68k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +120% since the first grant, against +11% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
4

Total granted

$1.1M
$68k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+120%
+11%

Still filing today

29%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time
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

  • IF
    INSTITUTE FOR CITIZENS AND SCHOLARS
    4× · 2019–2022 · $726k · revenue +120%
  • MU
    MILLERSVILLE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
    2× · 2022–2023 · $111k
  • CU
    COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
    3× · 2023–2025 · $96k

Funded once

  • UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH
    one grant, 2021 · $31k · revenue +11%
  • OO
    OFFICE OF THE CHANCELLOR
    one grant, 2021 · $25k
  • P
    PASSHE
    one grant, 2023 · $6k
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
04the grantee network

3 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. 3 of the 11 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)
3/3
Grantees still filing
3/3
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

INSTITUTE FOR CITIZENS AND SCHOLARS: $726,000 · OtherINSTITUTE FOR CITIZENS AND SCHOLARSMILLERSVILLE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $111,226 · OtherMILLERSVILLE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIACOMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $95,500 · OtherCOMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIACHEYNEY UNIVERSITY: $95,000 · OtherCHEYNEY UNIVERSITYEAST STROUDSBURG UNIVERSITY: $40,000 · OtherSlippery Rock University: $40,000 · Other+3 more: $37,220 · OtherSHIPPENSBURG UNIVERSITY STUDENT SERVICES INCORPORATED: $40,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH: $30,615 · Education
Other$1,144,946Education$70,615

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

25%50%75%100%$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetINSTITUTE FOR CITIZENS AND SCHOLARS: $726,000 over 4y, 3.5% of budgetSHIPPENSBURG UNIVERSITY STUDENT SERVICES INCORPORATED: $40,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH: $30,615 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 INSTITUTE FOR CITIZENS AND SCHOLARS ↗
  • Who funds SHIPPENSBURG UNIVERSITY STUDENT SERVICES INCORPORATED ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH ↗

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.

First Community Found…National Collegiate A…Folds of Honor Founda…Tulsa Community Found…
First Community Foundation Partnership of PennsylvaniaPA13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: First Community Foundation Partnership of Pennsylvania · National Collegiate Athletic Association · Folds of Honor Foundation · Tulsa Community 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's State System of Higher Education Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Pennsylvania's State System of Higher Education Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 11 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's State System of Higher Education’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