Skip to content
Swartzlander R Community Hs T W at a glance

· Private foundation

Swartzlander R Community Hs T W

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$34k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$7k
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, FY2018 to 2025.

Youth Development$93kHuman Services$64kCommunity Improvement$52kHealth$33kEnvironment$24kMembership Benefit$5k
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$5,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$714k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION OF$7,000
TWILIGHT WISH FOUNDATION$6,500
AMERICAN LEGION POST 210$5,000
WASHINGTON CROSSING COUNCIL$5,000
GIRL SCOUTS OF EASTERN PENNSYLVANIA$5,000
BUCKS COUNTY OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL$5,000
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 (FY18–25, $104k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 5%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 5%TWILIGHT WISH FOUNDATION: $19k → 6%TWILIGHT WISH FOUNDATION: $8k → 6%TWILIGHT WISH FOUNDATION: $8k → 6%BUCKS COUNTY OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL INC: $7k → 6%TWILIGHT WISH FOUNDATION: $7k → 6%TWILIGHT WISH FOUNDATION: $7k → 6%BUCKS COUNTY OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL INC: $7k → 6%TWILIGHT WISH FOUNDATION: $6k → 6%BUCKS COUNTY OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL INC: $6k → 6%TWILIGHT WISH FOUNDATION: $6k → 6%TWILIGHT WISH FOUNDATION: $6k → 6%BUCKS COUNTY OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL INC: $6k → 6%BUCKS COUNTY OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL: $5k → 6%BUCKS COUNTY OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL INC: $5k → 6%BUCKS COUNTY OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL: $5k → 6%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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$251k · 7 repeat orgs$20k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +68% since the first grant, against +57% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
3

Total granted

$251k
$15k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+68%
+57%

Still filing today

86%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHealthYouth DevelopmentArts & CultureOther
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

  • TW
    TWILIGHT WISH FOUNDATION
    8× · 2018–2025 · $64k · revenue +68%
  • GS
    GIRL SCOUTS OF EASTERN PENNSYLVANIA INC
    7× · 2018–2025 · $48k · revenue +18%
  • BC
    BUCKS COUNTY OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL INC
    7× · 2018–2025 · $40k · revenue +135%

Funded once

  • DH
    DOYLESTOWN HEALTH FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $8k · revenue +57%
  • BS
    BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA
    one grant, 2021 · $6k
  • WC
    WASHINGTON CROSSING COUNCIL BSA
    one grant, 2023 · $2k
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

7 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. 7 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
5/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TWILIGHT WISH FOUNDATION: $63,600 · Human ServicesTWILIGHT WISH FOUNDATIONBUCKS COUNTY OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL INC: $40,100 · Human ServicesBUCKS COUNTY OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL INCWASHINGTON CROSSING COUNCIL BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA: $38,100 · OtherWASHINGTON CROSSING COUNCI…VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION OF: $12,000 · OtherVILLAGE IMPROVEMENT ASSOCI…BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA: $5,500 · OtherBOY SCOUTS OF AMERICAAMERICAN LEGION POST 210: $5,000 · OtherAMERICAN LEGION POST 210+1 more: $2,000 · OtherGIRL SCOUTS OF EASTERN PENNSYLVANIA INC: $47,600 · Youth DevelopmentGIRL SCOUTS OF EAST…LENAPE VALLEY FOUNDATION: $25,600 · HealthLENAPE VALLEY…DOYLESTOWN HEALTH FOUNDATION: $7,500 · HealthDOYLESTOWN HE…HERITAGE CONSERVANCY INC: $23,600 · Arts & CultureHERITAGE …
Human Services$103,700Other$62,600Youth Development$47,600Health$33,100Arts & Culture$23,600

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 budgetTWILIGHT WISH FOUNDATION: $63,600 over 8y, 4.3% of budgetGIRL SCOUTS OF EASTERN PENNSYLVANIA INC: $47,600 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetBUCKS COUNTY OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL INC: $40,100 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetWASHINGTON CROSSING COUNCIL BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA: $38,100 over 6y, 0.8% of budgetLENAPE VALLEY FOUNDATION: $25,600 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetHERITAGE CONSERVANCY INC: $23,600 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetDOYLESTOWN HEALTH FOUNDATION: $7,500 over 1y, 0.1% 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 TWILIGHT WISH FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds GIRL SCOUTS OF EASTERN PENNSYLVANIA INC ↗
  • Who funds BUCKS COUNTY OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL INC ↗
  • Who funds WASHINGTON CROSSING COUNCIL BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA ↗
  • Who funds LENAPE VALLEY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds HERITAGE CONSERVANCY INC ↗
  • Who funds DOYLESTOWN HEALTH FOUNDATION ↗

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.

Seemon H & Natalie E …Foundations Community…Penn Community Bank F…The Robert Wood Johns…Chubb Charitable Foun…The Pfizer Foundation…Charities Aid Foundat…American Endowment Fo…Vanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…The Bank of America C…American Online Givin…
Seemon H & Natalie E Pines FndNJ13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Seemon H & Natalie E Pines Fnd · Foundations Community Partnership · Penn Community Bank Foundation · The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation · Chubb Charitable Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc

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 Swartzlander R Community Hs T W funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Swartzlander R Community Hs T W. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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 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-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 Swartzlander R Community Hs T W’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