Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →
Plinth

· Public charity

Onepgh Fund

Connect encourages cross-sector collaboration to achieve improved community health, well-being, and civic resilience in pittsburgh, pennsylvania.

$317k
Granted FY2023
6
Grants FY2023
2
States reached
$135k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
0198% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2023.

Environment$280kCommunity Improvement$137kHuman Services$74kYouth Development$41kPhilanthropy$24kEmployment$17kEducation$15kHealth$10kOther$0
02FY2023 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2023

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $59k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $258k
$53,050
Median grant
2
States reached
$474k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LANDFORCE$135,000
STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION$70,092
CHARLES STREET AREA COUNCIL$53,050
GOATSCAPE$24,450
COMMUNITY FOUNDATION FOR THE ALLEGH$24,350
TREE PITTSBURGH$10,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–23, $288k) 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 your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%COMPUTER REACH: $5k → 9%NEW SUN RISING: $44k → 11%NEW SUN RISING: $23k → 11%NEW SUN RISING: $5k → 11%BARTKO FOUNDATION: $5k → 11%YMCA GREATER PITTSBURGH: $16k → 11%CENTER OF LIFE: $15k → 11%LANDFORCE: $135k → 11%Landforce: $40k → 11%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

42%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$257k · 3 repeat orgs$357k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +156% since the first grant, against +25% for the ones you funded once.

3 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2023, 2 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
27

Total granted

$257k
$200k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+156%
+25%

Still filing today

100%
96%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 46% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $158k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’21’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’21’23
Human ServicesCommunity ImprovementYouth DevelopmentEmploymentInternationalHealthOther

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

  • PC
    PITTSBURGH CONSERVATION CORPS
    2× · 2021–2023 · $175k · revenue +156%
  • NS
    NEW SUN RISING
    2× · 2017–2018 · $72k · revenue +69%
  • HI
    HAZELWOOD INITIATIVE INC
    2× · 2018–2021 · $10k · revenue +185%

Funded once

  • YM
    YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF GREATER PITTSBURGH
    one grant, 2017 · $16k · revenue -15%
  • BA
    BROTHERS AND SISTERS EMERGING
    one grant, 2017 · $16k · revenue +25%
  • FO
    FOCUS ON RENEWAL STO-ROX NEIGHBORHOOD CORPORATION
    one grant, 2017 · $15k · revenue +14%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Sustainable Pittsburgh

Provide information to decision maker in the pittsburgh region to promote economic prosperity, social equity, and environmental quality for sustainable solutions for communities and businesses.

Environment
2
World Affairs Council of Pittsburgh

The world affairs council of pittsburgh's mission is to convene and connect people around global issues to build a competitive, thriving, and inclusive pittsburgh.

International
3
Pittsburgh Community Broadcasting Corporation

To create and distribute trusted content, build connections and strengthen our community through public media.

Arts & Culture
4
Pittsburgh Community Reinvestment G

PCRG is a coalition of community leaders working for economic justice, equitable investment practices and sufficient financial resources to revitalize communities throughout Allegheny County, PA

Community Improvement
5
Philadelphia Works Inc

Philadelphia works, inc. develops and manages smart workforce solutions that respond to business needs and increases economic opportunity for all philadelphia residents.

Employment
6
Pittsburgh United

Pittsburgh United, Inc. strives to advance social & economic justice in the

Community Improvement
7
Pittsburgh Technology Council

Membership organization formed to help tech companies succeed through a proven platform of business development, talent retention, government relations, and visibility services. companies at all growth stages use the pittsburgh technology…

—
8
Pittsburgh Community Services Inc

Provide programs to help individuals and/or families achieve self-sufficiency.

Human Services
9
Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy

We improve quality of life by enhancing and stewarding pittsburgh's parks in partnership with the community.

Recreation & Sports
10
Scenic Pittsburgh

To protect, preserve, and promote the scenic resources of southwestern pennsylvania.

Environment
11
Greater Pittsburgh Arts Council

By sharing resources and fostering meaningful relationships that strengthen the region's creative community, the greater pittsburgh arts council builds a more resourced, connected, and informed arts sector, empowering artists and arts…

Arts & Culture
12
Global Solutions Pittsburgh

The global switchboard stewards a diverse network of people and organizations to promote equitable global engagement in the pittsburgh region. we strive to build a region where all people value diversity, practice empathy, and work…

International

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New Voices Pittsburgh Inc and the most unlike its peers is Grassroots Grantmakers. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 27 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number16%0%<5yr12%6%5–10yr19%33%10–20yr20%27%20–35yr16%24%35–55yr16%9%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value16%0%<5yr12%12%5–10yr19%51%10–20yr20%11%20–35yr16%11%35–55yr16%14%55yr+

The field is 16% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 8% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/35
the rest of the field
8%
764/9,871

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.

04the grantee network

34 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. 34 of the 35 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
12
Early backer (in before they grew)
34/34
Grantees still filing
27/34
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

PITTSBURGH CONSERVATION CORPS — $175,000 · Human ServicesPITTSBURGH CONSERVATION CORPSNEW SUN RISING — $72,200 · Human ServicesNEW SUN RISINGYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF GREATER PITTSBURGH — $15,500 · Human ServicesYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF GREATER PITTSB…CENTER OF LIFE — $15,000 · Human Services+2 more — $10,000 · Human ServicesTHE STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC — $70,092 · OtherTHE STUDENT CONSERVATION …Carnegie Mellon University — $10,000 · OtherCarnegie Mellon Universit…ALLEGHENY INTERMEDIATE UNIT — $5,000 · OtherPittsburgh Soccer in the Community — $5,000 · OtherNORTH HILLS COMMUNITY OUTREACH INC — $5,000 · OtherJUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT OF WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA INC — $5,000 · OtherA JEWISH VOICE FOR PEACE — $5,000 · OtherPrimary Care Health Services Inc — $5,000 · OtherACHIEVA — $5,000 · OtherBIKE PITTSBURGH INC — $6,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY COLLEGE OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION — $5,000 · OtherNEW VOICES PITTSBURGH INC — $5,000 · OtherPUBLICSOURCE — $5,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY KITCHEN PITTSBURGH — $5,000 · OtherSOUTH HILLS INTERFAITH MINISTRIES — $5,000 · OtherCharles Street Corporation — $53,050 · Community ImprovementCharles Street …FOCUS ON RENEWAL STO-ROX NEIGHBORHOOD CORPORATION — $15,000 · Community ImprovementFOCUS ON RENEWA…HAZELWOOD INITIATIVE INC — $10,000 · Community ImprovementHAZELWOOD INITI…East Liberty Development Inc — $5,000 · Community ImprovementEast Liberty De…Grassroots Grantmakers — $5,000 · Community ImprovementGrassroots Gran…BROTHERS AND SISTERS EMERGING — $15,500 · Youth DevelopmentWill Allen Foundation — $15,000 · Youth DevelopmentHOMEWOOD CHIDREN'S VILLAGE — $10,500 · Youth DevelopmentALLEGHENY GOATSCAPE INC — $24,450 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF THE PITTSBURGH URBAN FOREST — $10,000 · EnvironmentCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF GREATER JOHNSTOWN — $24,350 · PhilanthropyALLPEOPLEBEHAPPY (F/K/A AMIZADE LTD) — $5,000 · PhilanthropyGOODWILL OF SOUTHWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA — $7,000 · EmploymentNEW CENTURY CAREERS — $5,000 · Employment
Human Services$287,700Other$146,092Community Improvement$88,050Youth Development$41,000Environment$34,450Philanthropy$29,350Employment$12,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetPITTSBURGH CONSERVATION CORPS — $175,000 over 2y, 18% of budgetNEW SUN RISING — $72,200 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetTHE STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC — $70,092 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCharles Street Corporation — $53,050 over 1y, 24% of budgetALLEGHENY GOATSCAPE INC — $24,450 over 1y, 13% of budgetCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF GREATER JOHNSTOWN — $24,350 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBROTHERS AND SISTERS EMERGING — $15,500 over 1y, 4.5% of budgetFOCUS ON RENEWAL STO-ROX NEIGHBORHOOD CORPORATION — $15,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetWill Allen Foundation — $15,000 over 1y, 26% of budgetCENTER OF LIFE — $15,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetHOMEWOOD CHIDREN'S VILLAGE — $10,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCarnegie Mellon University — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHAZELWOOD INITIATIVE INC — $10,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE PITTSBURGH URBAN FOREST — $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetGOODWILL OF SOUTHWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA — $7,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBIKE PITTSBURGH INC — $6,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetComputer Reach — $5,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetEast Liberty Development Inc — $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCOMMUNITY COLLEGE OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION — $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetJUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT OF WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA INC — $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPrimary Care Health Services Inc — $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNEW CENTURY CAREERS — $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetNEW VOICES PITTSBURGH INC — $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetPUBLICSOURCE — $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetBARTKO FOUNDATION — $5,000 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetGrassroots Grantmakers — $5,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetACHIEVA — $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetA JEWISH VOICE FOR PEACE — $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNORTH HILLS COMMUNITY OUTREACH INC — $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSOUTH HILLS INTERFAITH MINISTRIES — $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budget
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.

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.

Hillman Family Founda…The Pittsburgh Founda…The Heinz EndowmentsRichard King Mellon F…The Grable FoundationThe Buhl FoundationThe United Way of Sou…Eqt FoundationJefferson Regional Fo…McElhattan FoundationEden Hall FoundationThe Jack Buncher Foun…
Hillman Family FoundationsPA54.5× affinity25 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Hillman Family Foundations · The Pittsburgh Foundation · The Heinz Endowments · Richard King Mellon Foundation · The Grable Foundation · The Buhl Foundation · The United Way of Southwestern Pennsylvania · Eqt Foundation · Jefferson Regional Foundation · McElhattan Foundation · Eden Hall Foundation · The Jack Buncher 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 Onepgh Fund 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY20–25

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 35 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    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 camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home
    State money flows
    the interactive map of money crossing state lines