Skip to content
Sharp Emma O-Parker Foundation-Tr at a glance

· Private foundation

Sharp Emma O-Parker Foundation-Tr

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.

$905k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$250k
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, FY2019 to 2025.

Religion$600kEducation$450kArts & Culture$383kAnimals$375kYouth Development$280kHealth$200kPhilanthropy$135kHousing & Shelter$125kOther$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $55k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $350k
  • $250k+2 grants · $500k
$100,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$9k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SHELDRICK WILDLIFE TRUST$250,000
WESLEYAN SCHOOL$250,000
MON VALLEY BOYS ACADEMY$150,000
UPMC CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION$100,000
WESTMORELAND MUSEUM OF ART$100,000
CREATING PITTSBURGH TOMORROW$25,000
LAUREN DUNNE ASTLEY MEMORIAL FUND$20,000
COASTAL GEORGIA HISTORICAL SOCIETY$10,000
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 (FY19–21, $80k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%WARRIOR CANINE CONNECTION: $50k → 8%WARRIOR CANINE CONNECTION: $30k → 8%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.

83%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.3M · 14 repeat orgs$460k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +51% since the first grant, against -20% for those funded once.

14 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
6

Total granted

$2.3M
$155k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+51%
-20%

Still filing today

57%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 66% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $305k 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
EducationArts & CultureReligionHuman ServicesAnimalsRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • WS
    WESLEYAN SCHOOL INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $300k · revenue +4%
  • WM
    WESTMORELAND MUSEUM OF AMERICAN ART
    5× · 2019–2025 · $270k · revenue +77%
  • PS
    PITTSBURGH SYMPHONY INC
    2× · 2019–2020 · $93k · revenue +51%

Funded once

  • TG
    THE GATHERING PLACE INC
    one grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue -20%
  • UC
    UPMC CENTER FOR INTEGRATIVE MEDICINE
    one grant, 2024 · $25k
  • CJ
    CR JRS CHIP
    one grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue -4%
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
Western Pennsylvania Conservancy

The western pennsylvania conservancy protects and restores exceptional places to provide our region with clean waters and healthy forests, wildlife and natural areas for the benefit of present and future generations. the conservancy…

Environment
2
Point Park University

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…

—
3
Carnegie Institute

To preserve and expand the resources of art and science as agents of personal growth and social advancement in pittsburgh and beyond.

Arts & Culture
4
University of Pittsburgh

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…

Education
5
Wilson College

Wilson college empowers students to be confident and critical thinkers, creative visionaries, effective communicators, honorable leaders, and agents of justice.

Education
6
Zoological Society 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,…

Animals
7
Gettysburg College

Gettysburg college is a residential, undergraduate college of the liberal arts and sciences.

Education
8
Albright College

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

Education
9
Historical Society of Western Pennsylvania

The historical society of western pennsylvania is an educational institution that engages and inspires a large and inclusive audience with links to the past, understanding in the present, and guidance for the future by preserving regional…

Arts & Culture
10
Riverlife

Riverlife's mission is to create, activate, and celebrate pittsburgh's riverfronts, connecting people through exceptional places and experiences.

Environment
11
Chamber Music Pittsburgh

To present world class chamber music ensembles and soloists, promising emerging artists, and innovative programs; and to foster an appreciation for chamber music in the pittsburgh community by offering educational programs and experiences.

Arts & Culture
12
Chatham University

Chatham university prepares women and men to be world ready: to build lives of purpose and value and fulfilling work. (see continuation on schedule o)in addition to appropriate professional skills and liberal arts learning, chatham…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy; the most unlike its peers is Lauren Dunne Astley Memorial Fund. 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

15 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 15 of the 25 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
6/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PITTSBURGH THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY OF THE U: $300,000 · OtherPITTSBURGH THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY OF THE USHELDRICK WILDLIFE TRUST: $300,000 · OtherSHELDRICK WILDLIFE TRUSTTHE GATHERING PLACE YOUTH MINISTRY: $235,000 · OtherTHE GATHERING PLACE YOUTH MINISTRYSHADYSIDE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH: $150,000 · OtherSHADYSIDE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCHPARKER FOUNDATION DISTRIBUTION: $135,000 · OtherPARKER FOUNDATION DISTRIBUTIONHAND IN HAND OF GLYNN INC: $125,000 · OtherHAND IN HAND OF GLYNN INCCOALITION FOR CHRISTIAN OUTREACH: $100,000 · OtherCOALITION FOR CHRISTIAN OUTREACH+7 more: $205,000 · Other+7 moreWESLEYAN SCHOOL INC: $300,000 · EducationWESLEYAN SCHOOL INCMON VALLEY BOYS ACADEMY DBA THE TOM JOHN: $150,000 · EducationMON VALLEY BOYS ACAD…CR JRS CHIP: $25,000 · EducationLAUREN DUNNE ASTLEY MEMORIAL FUND: $20,000 · EducationWESTMORELAND MUSEUM OF AMERICAN ART: $270,000 · Arts & CultureWESTMORELAND MU…PITTSBURGH SYMPHONY INC: $92,500 · Arts & CulturePITTSBURGH SYMP…+1 more: $10,000 · Arts & CultureCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PITTSBURGH FOUNDATION: $100,000 · HealthWARRIOR CANINE CONNECTION INC: $80,000 · Human ServicesTHE DAVID SHELDRICK WILDLIFE TRUST USA INC: $75,000 · AnimalsPITTSBURGH PARKS CONSERVANCY: $70,000 · Recreation & Sports
Other$1,550,000Education$495,000Arts & Culture$372,500Health$100,000Human Services$80,000Animals$75,000Recreation & Sports$70,000

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 budgetWESLEYAN SCHOOL INC: $300,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetWESTMORELAND MUSEUM OF AMERICAN ART: $270,000 over 5y, 2.5% of budgetMON VALLEY BOYS ACADEMY DBA THE TOM JOHN: $150,000 over 1y, 26% of budgetHAND IN HAND OF GLYNN INC: $125,000 over 2y, 8.6% of budgetCOALITION FOR CHRISTIAN OUTREACH: $100,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PITTSBURGH FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPITTSBURGH SYMPHONY INC: $92,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWARRIOR CANINE CONNECTION INC: $80,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetTHE DAVID SHELDRICK WILDLIFE TRUST USA INC: $75,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetPITTSBURGH PARKS CONSERVANCY: $70,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetTHE GATHERING PLACE INC: $50,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetCR JRS CHIP: $25,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetLAUREN DUNNE ASTLEY MEMORIAL FUND: $20,000 over 1y, 19% of budgetCoastal Georgia Historical Society: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% 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.

The Pittsburgh Founda…The Ayco Charitable F…Morgan Stanley Global…Vanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…The Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Pittsburgh FoundationPA15× affinity5 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Pittsburgh Foundation · The Ayco Charitable Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Sharp Emma O-Parker Foundation-Tr funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Sharp Emma O-Parker Foundation-Tr. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 5%
  • Warrior Canine Connection Inc: 5% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
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 25 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 Sharp Emma O-Parker Foundation-Tr’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