Skip to content
The Sweigart Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Sweigart Family Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$79k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$69k
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, FY2017 to 2025.

Health$361kYouth Development$16kHousing & Shelter$15kRecreation & Sports$12kHuman Services$6kEducation$4kFood & Nutrition$3k
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $69k
$69,337
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHILDREN'S MIRACLE NETWORK$69,337
LANCASTER CNTY HOMELESSNESS COAL$10,000
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 (FY21–21, $500) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%GOOD SAMARITAN SERVICES: $500 → 9%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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$390k · 6 repeat orgs$26k to everyone else

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
11

Total granted

$390k
$16k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-9%
+25%

Still filing today

33%
55%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
Human ServicesFood & NutritionCommunity ImprovementEducationOther
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

  • CM
    CHILDREN'S MIRACLE NETWORK
    8× · 2017–2025 · $361k
  • BG
    BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF LANCASTER INC
    2× · 2021–2024 · $16k · revenue -9%
  • LC
    LANCASTER COUNTY SPORTS HALL OF FAM
    2× · 2023–2024 · $5k

Funded once

  • PM
    PENN MANOR HIGH SCHOOL
    one grant, 2020 · $3k
  • RM
    RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARTIES OF NORTHEASTERN PENSYLVANIA INC
    one grant, 2021 · $3k · revenue -19%
  • VS
    VALLEY SANTA INC
    one grant, 2021 · $3k · revenue -13%
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
Lancaster Housing Services Incorporated
Housing & Shelter
2
Santa's Helpers of Lampeter-Strasburg

Charitable gifts for children

Human Services
3
Lancaster Equity Inc

Lancaster equity coordinates efforts to advance communities where everyone has an opportunity to thrive, whether that be through neighborhood revitalization, living wage work, entrepreneurship, or safe and affordable housing.

Housing & Shelter
4
The Lancaster County Partners for Youth
Philanthropy
5
Mom's House Inc of Lancaster

Empower single parents and their children to set and attain educational goals through parent support and mentorship, early childhood education and safe affordable childcare.

—
6
Partners With Purpose

Promoting the development and expansion of affordable housing for low- income families in the greater lancaster county area.

Human Services
7
Lancaster Childrens Home

The lancaster childrens home is committed to providing comprehensive treatment services to children of need in the most effective and least restrictive setting possible.

—
8
Lancaster County Chamber of Commerce Inc

Support member businesses through education and promotion, and support the quality of life in lancaster county through promoting compatible economic development.

Community Improvement
9
Lancaster Harm Reduction Project Inc
Health
10
Chestnut Housing Corporation

Chestnut housing provides affordable rental housing to people experiencing homelessness because a home is the foundation of a healthy and fulfilling life. we connect people and communities of faith with tangible ways to create more…

Housing & Shelter
11
Lancaster Medical Society Foundatio
—
12
The New School of Lancaster Dba New School Montessori

The mission is to facilitate the unfolding of each child's unique potential through an outstanding montessori education that enables a child to meet future challenges, and that encourages a love of learning, independent thinking, social…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Good Samaritan Services; the most unlike its peers is Valley Santa Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

8 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. 8 of the 18 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)
8/8
Grantees still filing
3/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CHILDREN'S MIRACLE NETWORK: $361,183 · OtherCHILDREN'S MIRACLE NETWORKBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF LANCASTER INC: $15,836 · Other+10 more: $28,396 · Other+10 moreVALLEY SANTA INC: $2,500 · Human ServicesWATER STREET MINISTRIES: $2,500 · Human ServicesGOOD SAMARITAN SERVICES: $500 · Human ServicesLANCASTER COUNTY PROJECT FOR THE NE: $2,500 · Food & NutritionLANCASTER REDEVELOPMENT FUND: $1,500 · Community ImprovementMOUNT SAINT MARY'S UNIVERSITY INC: $1,000 · Education
Other$405,415Human Services$5,500Food & Nutrition$2,500Community Improvement$1,500Education$1,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF LANCASTER INC: $15,836 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetRONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARTIES OF NORTHEASTERN PENSYLVANIA INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetVALLEY SANTA INC: $2,500 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetLANCASTER COUNTY PROJECT FOR THE NE: $2,500 over 4y, 1.1% of budgetWATER STREET MINISTRIES: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLANCASTER REDEVELOPMENT FUND: $1,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMOUNT SAINT MARY'S UNIVERSITY INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGOOD SAMARITAN SERVICES: $500 over 1y, 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 BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF LANCASTER INC ↗
  • Who funds RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARTIES OF NORTHEASTERN PENSYLVANIA INC ↗
  • Who funds VALLEY SANTA INC ↗
  • Who funds LANCASTER COUNTY PROJECT FOR THE NE ↗
  • Who funds WATER STREET MINISTRIES ↗
  • Who funds LANCASTER REDEVELOPMENT FUND ↗
  • Who funds MOUNT SAINT MARY'S UNIVERSITY INC ↗
  • Who funds GOOD SAMARITAN SERVICES ↗

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.

High FoundationLancaster County Comm…Amazonsmile Foundation
High FoundationPA13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: High Foundation · Lancaster County Community Foundation · 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 Sweigart Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Sweigart Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →median 3%
  • Mount Saint Mary's University Inc: 3% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
2report 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 18 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 Sweigart Family’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