Skip to content
Pietas Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Pietas Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$88k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0186% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2025.

Education$487kScience & Tech$227kArts & Culture$20kPublic Safety & Disaster$15kRecreation & Sports$5kHuman Services$1kReligion$1kOther$0
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k6 grants · $18k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $20k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$5,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$46k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LEHIGH UNIVERSITY$50,000
ARTS QUEST$10,000
WOODRUFF ARTS CENTER$10,000
HUSKY FOOTBALL CLUB$5,000
ANDRE REED FOUNDATION$5,000
LOWER SAUCON FIRE RESCUE$5,000
DEWEY FIRE COMPANY AMBULANCE$1,000
DEWEY FIRE COMPANY$1,000
ST MICHAEL THE ARCH ANGEL SCHOOL$1,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY22–22, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 5%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%SAINT MICHAEL THE ARCHANGEL: $1k → 5%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.

55%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$314k · 5 repeat orgs$254k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
9

Total granted

$314k
$176k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
+46%

Still filing today

60%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 11% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $78k went to new ones.

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

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

’21’22’23’24’25
EducationArts & CultureHealthPhilanthropyPublic Safety & DisasterHuman ServicesOther
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

  • GI
    GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
    4× · 2021–2024 · $227k
  • TJ
    THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY
    3× · 2021–2023 · $60k · revenue +15%
  • LS
    LOWER SAUCON FIRE RESCUE
    2× · 2024–2025 · $10k · revenue -48%

Funded once

  • AF
    AMERICANS FOR OXFORD INCgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $100k · revenue +30%
  • GEORGIA TECH FOUNDATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2024 · $65k · revenue +46%
  • LA
    LEAP ACADEMY
    one grant, 2023 · $3k
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
Drexel University

Drexel university fulfills its founder's vision of preparing each new generation of students for productive professional and civic lives while also focusing its collective expertise on solving society's greatest problems. drexel is an…

Education
2
Philadelphia University

The organization is an affiliate within thomas jefferson university/jefferson health; a comprehensive professional university and tax-exempt integrated healthcare delivery system ("system"), with a tripartite mission of education, research…

Education
3
University of Miami

See Form 990, Part I, Line 1, Description of Organization Mission.

Education
4
Seton Hill University

Comprehensive institution of higher learning providing undergraduate and graduate student education.

Education
5
Albright College

As a diverse community of learners, we cultivate integrity, curiosity, connection and resilience.

Education
6
New York University

Nyu is a private university with approximately 60,000 matriculating students in 20 schools and institutes. nyu's primary missions are education, research and scholarship, and patient care.

Education
7
Alvernia University

Alvernia university is a catholic comprehensive university with a liberal arts foundation founded by the bernardine franciscan sisters in 1958. see continuation on schedule o.

—
8
Endicott College

Endicott college offers students a vibrant academic environment that remains true to its founding principle of integrating professional and liberal arts with experiential learning. for more information see schedule o.

Education
9
Georgian Court University

Georgian court university (gcu), provides a comprehensive liberal arts education and is open to students of all faiths, delivers a curriculum that promotes scholarship, service, and personal development.

Education
10
Dickinson College

Dickinson college provides a useful, innovative and interdisciplinary education in the liberal arts and sciences to prepare students to lead rich and fulfilling lives of engaged global citizenship

Education
11
Emory University

Emory University's mission is to create, preserve, teach, and apply knowledge in the service of humanity. (See Schedule O for continuation)

Education
12
Saint Joseph's University

As philadelphia's jesuit catholic university, saint joseph's provides a rigorous, student-centered education rooted in the liberal arts. we prepare students for personal excellence, professional success, and engaged citizenship. striving…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Georgia Tech Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Andre Reed Foundation. 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

11 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. 11 of the 22 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
7/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $200,000 · EducationTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIAAMERICANS FOR OXFORD INC: $100,000 · EducationAMERICANS FOR OXFORD INCGEORGIA TECH FOUNDATION INC: $65,000 · EducationGEORGIA TECH FOUNDATION INCTHOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY: $60,000 · EducationTHOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITYLEHIGH UNIVERSITY: $50,000 · EducationLEHIGH UNIVERSITYGEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $227,000 · OtherGEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGYIndividual grant recipient: $9,000 · Other+9 more: $17,000 · Other+9 moreARTSQUEST: $10,000 · Arts & CultureROBERT W WOODRUFF ARTS CENTER INC: $10,000 · Arts & CultureLOWER SAUCON FIRE RESCUE: $10,000 · HealthThe Andre Reed Foundation: $8,150 · PhilanthropySaint Michael The Archangel: $1,000 · Human ServicesDEWEY FIRE COMPANY NO 1: $1,000 · Public Safety & Disaster
Education$475,000Other$253,000Arts & Culture$20,000Health$10,000Philanthropy$8,150Human Services$1,000Public Safety & Disaster$1,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $200,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICANS FOR OXFORD INC: $100,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetGEORGIA TECH FOUNDATION INC: $65,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY: $60,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetLEHIGH UNIVERSITY: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLOWER SAUCON FIRE RESCUE: $10,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetROBERT W WOODRUFF ARTS CENTER INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Andre Reed Foundation: $8,150 over 2y, 5.9% 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 TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA ↗
  • Who funds AMERICANS FOR OXFORD INC ↗
  • Who funds GEORGIA TECH FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds LEHIGH UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds LOWER SAUCON FIRE RESCUE ↗
  • Who funds ARTSQUEST ↗
  • Who funds ROBERT W WOODRUFF ARTS CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds The Andre Reed Foundation ↗
  • Who funds Saint Michael The Archangel ↗
  • Who funds DEWEY FIRE COMPANY NO 1 ↗

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Fidelity Investments …
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA5.4× affinity5 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Pietas Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Pietas Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%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
    1get no government money at all
    2report 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.

    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 22 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-PF 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 Pietas’ 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