Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Merle E & Olive Lee Gilliand Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$134k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$107k
Largest
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Education$458kHousing & Shelter$185kHuman Services$115kReligion$110kFood & Nutrition$80kRecreation & Sports$40kHealth$25kOther$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k6 grants · $27k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $107k
$3,434
Median grant
3
States reached
$1.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DUQUESNE UNIVERSITY$106,869
WARREN WILSON COLLEGE$6,869
FOX CHAPEL PRESB CHURCH$6,869
PITTSBURGH THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY$3,434
UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH$3,434
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH$3,434
SHADY SIDE ACADEMY$3,434
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 (FY19–23, $185k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%BETHLEHEM HAVEN: $60k → 11%BETHLEHEM HAVEN OF PITTSBURGH INC: $40k → 11%BETHLEHEM HAVEN OF PITTSBURGH INC: $35k → 11%BETHLEHEM HAVEN: $30k → 11%BETHLEHEM HAVEN: $20k → 11%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 8% of The Merle E & Olive Lee Gilliand Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

The Merle E & Olive Lee Gilliand Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$948k · 12 repeat orgs$115k to everyone else

12 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
4

Total granted

$948k
$115k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+44%
+49%

Still filing today

67%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationHuman ServicesFood & NutritionRecreation & SportsHealthOther
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

  • DU
    DUQUESNE UNIVERSITY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT
    8× · 2017–2025 · $345k · revenue +29%
  • BH
    BETHLEHEM HAVEN OF PITTSBURGH
    5× · 2019–2023 · $185k · revenue +9%
  • GP
    GREATER PITTSBURGH COMMUNITY FOOD BANK
    3× · 2020–2023 · $80k · revenue +13%

Funded once

  • GF
    GILLILAND FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2021 · $40k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $25k
  • CH
    CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PITTSBURGH FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $25k · revenue +49%
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
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…

—
2
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
3
Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania

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…

Education
4
Highmark Health Group

Working as an integrated system within highmark health, employees at all of ahn's care sites, including hospitals, health + wellness pavilions, primary and specialty care offices and more, are committed to improving health and promoting…

—
5
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
6
Upmc Pinnacle Hospitals

Upmc pinnacle hospitals mission as a charitable organization is dedicatied to maintaining and improving the health and quality of life for all persons of the central pennsylvania area.

Health
7
The Pittsburgh Promise Foundation

The pittsburgh promise promotes high educational aspirations among urban youth, funds scholarships for post-secondary access, and fuels a prepared and diverse regional workforce.

Philanthropy
8
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.

—
9
Elizabethtown College

Provide a transformative educational experience that cultivates strengths of its students.

Education
10
Albany College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences

We educate the next generation of leaders to improve the health of our society.

Education
11
Springside Chestnut Hill Academy

See schedule owe are an inclusive community on a mission to inspire unbounded curiosity and independent thought in every one of our students. in a unique educational environment that extends well beyond campus, we nurture students'…

Education
12
The Children's Institute of Pittsburgh

To heal. to teach. to empower. to amaze.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of Pittsburgh; the most unlike its peers is Pitcare Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

9 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. 9 of the 16 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
8/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DUQUESNE UNIVERSITY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT: $345,167 · EducationDUQUESNE UNIVERSITY OF THE HOLY SPIRITWARREN WILSON COLLEGE: $55,167 · EducationWARREN WILSON COLLEGESHADY SIDE ACADEMY: $27,584 · EducationSHADY SIDE ACADEMYUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH: $24,365 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGHPITCARE INC: $75,000 · OtherPITCARE INCFOX CHAPEL PRESB CHURCH: $55,167 · OtherFOX CHAPEL PRESB CHURCHGILLILAND FOUNDATION INC: $40,000 · OtherGILLILAND FOUNDATION INCFIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH: $27,584 · OtherFIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCHPITTSBURGH THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY OF THE UTD PREBY CHRC UTD STS AMER: $27,584 · OtherPITTSBURGH THEOLOGICAL SEMINA…Individual grant recipient: $25,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $25,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+1 more: $5,818 · OtherBETHLEHEM HAVEN OF PITTSBURGH: $185,000 · Human ServicesBETHLEHEM HAVEN OF …GREATER PITTSBURGH COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $80,000 · Food & NutritionPITTSBURGH PARKS CONSERVANCY: $40,000 · Recreation & SportsCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PITTSBURGH FOUNDATION: $25,000 · Health
Education$452,283Other$281,153Human Services$185,000Food & Nutrition$80,000Recreation & Sports$40,000Health$25,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetDUQUESNE UNIVERSITY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT: $345,167 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetBETHLEHEM HAVEN OF PITTSBURGH: $185,000 over 5y, 1.5% of budgetGREATER PITTSBURGH COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $80,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetPITCARE INC: $75,000 over 4y, 8.7% of budgetWARREN WILSON COLLEGE: $55,167 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetPITTSBURGH PARKS CONSERVANCY: $40,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetSHADY SIDE ACADEMY: $27,584 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PITTSBURGH FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH: $24,365 over 6y, 0.0% 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 DUQUESNE UNIVERSITY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT ↗
  • Who funds BETHLEHEM HAVEN OF PITTSBURGH ↗
  • Who funds GREATER PITTSBURGH COMMUNITY FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds PITCARE INC ↗
  • Who funds WARREN WILSON COLLEGE ↗
  • Who funds PITTSBURGH PARKS CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds SHADY SIDE ACADEMY ↗
  • Who funds CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PITTSBURGH FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH ↗

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.

Amazonsmile FoundationWA3.2× affinity5 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 The Merle E & Olive Lee Gilliand Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Merle E & Olive Lee Gilliand Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%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 · 0–10%
    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 16 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 Merle E & Olive Lee Gilliand’s filings →

    More from the funding graph