· Private foundation
Richard and Dana Green Philanthropic Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k46 grants · $18k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $57k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| FRANKLIN TEMPLETON RENAISSANCE CHARITABLE FOUNDATION | $57,293 |
| JEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER PITTSBURGH | $20,000 |
| TEMPLE SINAI | $7,792 |
| SWARTHMORE COLLEGE | $3,364 |
| DUKE MEDICAL CENTER | $1,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $430 |
| JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICES (JFCS) | $380 |
| FRIENDSHIP CIRCLE - C O CHAB | $330 |
| WQED | $260 |
| WESA - PITTSBURGH'S NPR NEWS STATION | $250 |
| ST MARGARET FOUNDATION | $250 |
| CONGREGATION BETH SHALOM | $208 |
| Individual grant recipient | $200 |
| SHADYSIDE HOSPITAL FOUNDATION | $200 |
| PITTSBURGH SYMPHONY | $200 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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 +31% since the first grant, against +18% for the ones you funded once.
72 repeat relationships — 32 still active in FY2025, 40 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 22% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $58k 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
SWARTHMORE COLLEGE6× · 2017–2025 · $8k · revenue +52%- CICARNEGIE INSTITUTE6× · 2018–2024 · $7k · revenue +28%
- PSPITTSBURGH SYMPHONY INC9× · 2017–2025 · $3k · revenue +84%
Funded once
- RMRONALD MCDONALD HOUSEone grant, 2022 · $1k
- PSPRIME STAGEone grant, 2023 · $300 · revenue -21%
- TPTHE PITTSBURGH FOUNDATION (ELLEN WEISS KANDER AWARD)one grant, 2017 · $300
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.
The children's hospital of philadelphia, the oldest hospital in the united states dedicated exclusively to pediatrics, strives to be the world leader in the advancement of health care for children by integrating excellent patient care,…
Provides innovative education in a dynamic urban setting. dedicated to academic excellence and community engagement,we prepare students of diverse backgrounds with the knowledge, skill,and experience to lead meaningful lives as informed…
The fsmb serves as the voice for state medical boards, supporting them through education, assessment, research and advocacy while providing services and initiatives that promote patient safety, quality health care and regulatory best…
The university of pittsburgh, founded in 1787, is one of the oldest institutions of higher education in the united states and one of the nation's top public research universities. for more than two centuries, the university of pittsburgh…
The zoological society of pittsburgh is dedicated to being a leader in, and significant contributor to, the conservation of endangered and threatened species. the society provides an enjoyable family experience that fosters understanding,…
Research, education and general - princeton university is a private not-for-profit, non-sectarian institution of higher learning with approximately 5,700 undergraduate and 3,300 graduate students. 2,500 students graduated in the 2024-2025…
The trustees of the university of pennsylvania (the "university") sees itself as having a public service mission. in such regard, the university aims to provide a rich and diverse educational environment for its students; to pioneer…
To bring quality public television programs and resources to communities throughout new jersey and its tri-state neighbors. its content, both on-air and online, aims to reflect the diverse
National public radio, inc. ("npr") works collaboratively with member public radio station licensees ("member stations") to create a more informed public, one that is challenged and invigorated by a deeper understanding and appreciation of…
The foundation is set up to deliver one program - look good feel better. the mission of this nationwide program is to improve the quality of life of women, men, and teens undergoing cancer treatment by offering advice on how to cope with…
Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.
To support education and research at college, university, and research libraries.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is March of Dimes Inc and the most unlike its peers is Little Sisters of the Poor. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 44 years old; the field is 19. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 9% 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.
81 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. 81 of the 169 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 JEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER PITTSBURGH ↗
- Who funds SWARTHMORE COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds CARNEGIE INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds PITTSBURGH SYMPHONY INC ↗
- Who funds ST MARGARET FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PITTSBURGH PUBLIC THEATER CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds WQED MULTIMEDIA ↗
- Who funds Family Hospice and Palliative Care ↗
- Who funds University of Michigan ↗
- Who funds HILLEL ACADEMY OF PITTSBURGH ↗
- Who funds LAMBDA LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUCATION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds GREATER PITTSBURGH COMMUNITY FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF WESTERN PA INC ↗
- Who funds SHADYSIDE HOSPITAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PITTSBURGH CULTURAL TRUST ↗
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: Hillman Family Foundations · The Fine Foundation · The Pittsburgh Foundation · Richard King Mellon Foundation · The Jack Buncher Foundation · Jewish Federation of Greater Pittsburgh · The Grable Foundation · The Heinz Endowments · Eqt Foundation · Staunton Farm Foundation 540-054 Dba Staunton Farm Foundation · Giant Eagle Foundation · The Benter 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 Richard and Dana Green Philanthropic Foundation 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.
- Greater Boston Food Bank Inc — 22% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 0% of income from government
- Wounded Warrior Project Inc — 0% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Richard and Dana Green Philanthropic Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Richard and Dana Green Philanthropic Foundation 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.