· Private foundation
The Society for Analytical Chemists of Pittsburgh
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 61% of THE SOCIETY FOR ANALYTICAL CHEMISTS OF PITTSBURGH’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k86 grants · $125k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $70k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH | $40,000 |
| UNIV OF HEALTH SCIENCES & PHARMACY | $10,000 |
| BLACK HAWK COLLEGE | $10,000 |
| JUNIATA COLLEGE | $10,000 |
| CAMPBELL UNIVERSITY | $9,996 |
| TRUSTEES OF TRINITY COLLEGE | $9,857 |
| ST FRANCIS COLLEGE | $6,150 |
| ST VINCENT COLLEGE | $6,000 |
| EASTERN UNIVERSITY | $5,000 |
| STOCKTON UNIVERSITY | $5,000 |
| EASTERN UNIVERSITY | $4,858 |
| ACS DIVISION OF ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY | $4,150 |
| MAD SCIENCE OF PITTSBURGH | $3,400 |
| JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT OF SOUTH CENTRAL PA | $3,400 |
| CHILDREN'S MUSEUM OF PITTSBURGH | $3,400 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 84% of your 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.
67 repeat relationships — 19 still active in FY2025, 48 since wound down; 67 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, 41% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $115k 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
- CICARNEGIE INSTITUTE7× · 2017–2025 · $85k · revenue +57%
UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH6× · 2017–2025 · $79k · revenue +44%- SFSAINT FRANCIS UNIVERSITY6× · 2017–2023 · $54k · revenue +15%
Funded once
- SSSPone grant, 2017 · $62k
- WSWAYNE STATE UNIVERSITYone grant, 2019 · $60k
- MUMIAMI UNIVERSITYone grant, 2021 · $50k
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.
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…
Wilson college empowers students to be confident and critical thinkers, creative visionaries, effective communicators, honorable leaders, and agents of justice.
As a diverse community of learners, we cultivate integrity, curiosity, connection and resilience.
The university's goal in the coming decade is to advance learning through the integration of teaching, research and service to others. the core of this goal is to prepare graduates to engage with the world and lead lives of meaning. to do…
See schedule o.we are inspired by the ideals of our founder who, in 1896, emphasized respect for all people and ideas, who honored knowledge with practice, progress and the common good. our historical commitment to experiential learning…
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
Depauw university develops leaders the world needs through an uncommon commitment to the liberal arts. depauw's diverse and inclusive learning and living experience, distinctive in its rigorous intellectual engagement and its global and…
See schedule o.founded in 1866, carleton college is a private, coeducational liberal arts college of 2,007 students located in the historic river town of northfield, minnesota. nationally recognized as the nation's top college for…
To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.
St. marys university, as a catholic marianist university, fosters the formation of people in faith and educates leaders for the common good through community, integrated liberal arts and professional education, and academic excellence.
The mission of the university is to educate leaders for a global society who are strong in character and judgment, confident in their identity and vocation, and committed to service and justice.
Rooted in the liberal arts & sciences & lutheran expression of the christian faith, & is committed to offering a challenging education that develops qualities of mind, spirit, & body necessary for a rewarding life of leadership & service…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Gettysburg College and the most unlike its peers is Pasco Schiavo Charitable Foundation Tr. 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 79 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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 853 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 CARNEGIE INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH ↗
- Who funds SAINT FRANCIS UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds SAINT VINCENT COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds DUQUESNE UNIVERSITY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT ↗
- Who funds SPECTROSCOPY SOCIETY OF PITTSBURGH ↗
- Who funds WAYNESBURG UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds PITTSBURGH SECTION AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds Carnegie Mellon University ↗
- Who funds North Central College ↗
- Who funds ROANOKE COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds LA ROCHE UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds HOBART AND WILLIAM SMITH COLLEGES ↗
- Who funds DOMINICAN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds Oberlin College ↗
- Who funds University of Health Sciences and Pharmacy in St Louis ↗
- Who funds WQED MULTIMEDIA ↗
- Who funds AVILA UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY ↗
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 · Spectroscopy Society of Pittsburgh · Folds of Honor Foundation · Council of Independent Colleges · Ibm International Foundation · Eqt Foundation · The Jack Buncher Foundation · Staunton Farm Foundation 540-054 Dba Staunton Farm Foundation · American Chemical Society · The Grable Foundation · Richard King Mellon Foundation · The Heinz Endowments
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 Society for Analytical Chemists of Pittsburgh 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 Trustees of Princeton University — 11% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston College — 3% of income from government
- Stetson University Inc — 0% of income from government
- Saint Michael's College — 0% of income from government
- Trinity College — 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 The Society for Analytical Chemists of Pittsburgh?
Find your warmest path to The Society for Analytical Chemists of Pittsburgh 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.