· Private foundation
The Richless Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| FOX CHAPEL PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH | $9,720 |
| CYSTIC FIBROSIS FOUNDATION | $350 |
| BAYSHORE GARDENS COMMUNITY CHURCH | $260 |
| HISTORIC SOCIETY OF BLAIRSVILLE AREA | $150 |
| MARIE SHELBY GARDENS | $125 |
| COALITION FOR CHRISTIAN OUTREACH | $100 |
| LAURIE ANN WEST COMMUNITY CENTER | $100 |
| COOPER-SIEGEL COMMUNITY LIBRARY | $100 |
| ROOTS OF FAITH MINISTRIES | $79 |
| PARKVIEW EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE | $50 |
| LEUKEMIA & LYMPHOMA SOCIETY | $50 |
| RAILS TO TRAILS | $50 |
| Individual grant recipient | $50 |
| PARKINSONS FOUNDATION | $50 |
| NATURE CONSERVANCY | $50 |
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 (FY22–24, $33) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 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 +11% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
21 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 6 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, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $689 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
The Marie Selby Botanical Gardens Inc6× · 2017–2024 · $600 · revenue +183%- BCBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC6× · 2017–2025 · $450 · revenue +4%
- FCFox Chapel District Association6× · 2017–2022 · $210 · revenue +909%
Funded once
- HUHOPEWELL UNITED METHODIST CHURCHone grant, 2020 · $20k
- BCBLAIRSVILLE CEMETERY ASSOCIATIONone grant, 2020 · $5k
- UIURBAN IMPACTone grant, 2017 · $500
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.
Susan g. komen 's mission is to save lives by meeting the most critical needs in our communities & investing in breakthrough research to prevent & cure breast cancer.
To make individualized medicines routinely and rapidly accessible to rare disease patients worldwide.
Our mission is to break down barriers to als research to find effective treatments. by uniting academia, the pharma and biotech industry, government, venture capital, related nonprofits, and the als community, we aim to overcome the…
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 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…
The alliance for aging research is the leading nonprofit organization dedicated to changing the narrative to achieve healthy aging and equitable access to care.
Assist banner health complete its mission to make health care easier so life can be better by providing integrated & coordinated care & population health management.
The critical path institute is a catalyst in the development of new approaches that advance medical innovation and regulatory science. this is achieved by leading teams that share data, knowledge and expertise resulting in sound, consensus…
Compass champions, connects, and supports diverse scientist leaders to improve the well-being of people and nature.
To advocate for quality cancer care for all people touched by cancer.
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Parkinson's Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Jeff Smith Ministries. 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 47 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) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% 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.
20 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. 20 of the 54 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 COALITION FOR CHRISTIAN OUTREACH ↗
- Who funds The Marie Selby Botanical Gardens Inc ↗
- Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds CYSTIC FIBROSIS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds Open Hand Ministries Inc ↗
- Who funds Fox Chapel District Association ↗
- Who funds Community Bible Study ↗
- Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds Fox Chapel Area Land Trust ↗
- Who funds PARKINSON'S FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds GENEVA COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds GREATER PITTSBURGH COMMUNITY FOOD BANK ↗
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: The Pittsburgh Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 The Richless 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.
- The Marie Selby Botanical Gardens 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.