· Public charity
Pennsylvania Trout Inc
To conserve, protect, restore, and sustain Pennsylvanias cold water fisheries especially our wild trout resources.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 10 grants below total $120,396 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $136,244 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $15,848 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k3 grants · $21k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $100k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Clinton County Conservation Distric | $15,000 |
| Tub Mill Trout Club Unlimited | $15,000 |
| Lehigh County Conservation District | $15,000 |
| Kettle Creek Watershed Assoc | $15,000 |
| Western PA Conservancy | $14,984 |
| Elk County Conservation District | $12,663 |
| Western PA Conservancy | $12,104 |
| Western PA Conservancy | $7,500 |
| Huntington County Conservation Dist | $7,342 |
| Somerset Conservation District | $5,803 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 89% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +125% since the first grant, against -4% for the ones you funded once.
10 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 64% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $43k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- WPWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY7× · 2017–2024 · $112k · revenue +70%
- TUTROUT UNLIMITED INC3× · 2017–2022 · $39k · revenue +133%
- TTTUBMILL TROUT CLUB UNLIMITED4× · 2017–2024 · $36k · revenue +125% · 34% of their budget
Funded once
- FLFRANK LLOYD WRIGHT'S FALLINGWATERone grant, 2020 · $13k
- WCWarren County Conservation Districtone grant, 2023 · $9k
- BCBERKS COUNTY CONSERVATION DISTRICTone grant, 2023 · $9k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
Cold water conservation and restoration for clean flowing rivers that support native fish habitat
Clean up waterways in the western pa region increase habitat for specific native wildlife
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…
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…
To conserve, protect and restore North America's coldwater fisheries and their watersheds.
The mission of the lancaster county conservancy is "providing wild and forested lands and clean waterways for our community forever". the charitable purposes of the lancaster county conservancy include preservation of natural lands,…
Conservation efforts to study and maintain high quality, clean water on portions of the mcmichael creek in monroe county, pa, and education programming in stream biology and ecology.
NYSCTU's Mission Statement:To unite people to care for conserve, protect, restore, and sustain coldwater fisheries and their watersheds in New York and bordering states.Council Vision:NYSCTU envisions a future in which the challenges of an…
Tar river land conservancy preserves the natural and cultural resources of the tar river basin and surrounding areas by working in partnership with private landowners, public agencies and others to protect rural land, riparian corridors…
To conserve functioning salmon/steelhead eco-system at watershed levels, integrate angling activities with basic scientific research, collect raw data, monitor environmental functions, salmon/steelhead population dynamics, public…
Upper missouri waterkeeper protects fishable, swimmable, drinkable water throughout the 25,000 square miles of montana's upper missouri river basin of montana. to accomplish this mission we actively engage with citizens, stakeholders and…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wildlands Conservancy Inc and the most unlike its peers is Hunts for Healing Inc. 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 52 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 17% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 8% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
19 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 19 of the 34 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
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.
- Who funds WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds TROUT UNLIMITED INC ↗
- Who funds TUBMILL TROUT CLUB UNLIMITED ↗
- Who funds NORTHCENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds 332 PERKIOMEN CHAPTER OF TROUT UNLIMITED ↗
- Who funds TROUT UNLIMITED-Cumberland Valley ↗
- Who funds Penns Valley Conservation Association ↗
- Who funds DELAWARE RIVERKEEPER NETWORK ↗
- Who funds CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds BUSHKILL STREAM CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN RIVERS INC ↗
- Who funds HUNTS FOR HEALING INC ↗
- Who funds TROUT UNLIMITED CHESTNUT RIDGE CHAPTER ↗
- Who funds AUDUBON SOCIETY OF WESTERN PA ↗
- Who funds HERITAGE CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds WILDLANDS CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds EASTERN PENNSYLVANIA COALITION FOR ABANDONED MINE RECLAMATION ↗
- Who funds DONEGAL CHAPTER TROUT UNLIMITED ↗
- Who funds BRODHEADS WATERSHED ASSOCIATION ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Foundation for Pennsylvania Watersheds · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Weconservepa · Trout Unlimited Inc · Ppl Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Trout 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.
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.