Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

The United Way of the Shippensburg Area

THE UNITED WAY OF THE SHIPPENSBURG AREA is a unified fund raising organization which solicites charitable donations from the public and distributes such funds to the various charitable, civic, and social welfare organizations of the community.

$183k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$40k
Largest
01What you fund
0164% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY20172025.

Food & Nutrition$218kYouth Development$215kEducation$151kHuman Services$94kCommunity Improvement$90kHousing & Shelter$11kOther$438k
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 10 grants below total $143,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $182,730 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $39,730 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $23k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $121k
$12,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SHIPPENSBURG PRODUCE OUTREACH$40,000
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF CHAMBERSBURG &$25,000
SHIPPENSBURG COMMUNITY NURSE$17,500
SHIPPENSBURG PUBLIC LIBRARY$14,500
CHRIST AMONG NEIGHBORS$12,500
CARLISLE CARES$11,000
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES$6,000
KATIE'S PLACE IN SHIPPENSBURG$5,500
VIGILANT HOSE COMPANY NO 1$5,500
WEST END FIRE AND RESCUE COMPANY$5,500
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 (FY17–25, $94k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 15%. 16% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 15%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $15k → 8%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $10k → 12%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $15k → 16%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $15k → 8%DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES: $7k → 8%DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES: $7k → 8%DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES: $7k → 8%DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES: $6k → 8%DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES: $6k → 8%DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES: $6k → 8%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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.2M · 16 repeat orgs$11k to everyone else

16 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
1

Total granted

$1.2M
$11k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+46%
+262%

Still filing today

69%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $11k 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
Youth DevelopmentHuman ServicesFood & NutritionEducationCommunity ImprovementHousing & ShelterOther

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

  • SP
    SHIPPENSBURG PRODUCE AND OUTREACH
    9× · 2017–2025 · $218k · revenue +672% · 28% of their budget
  • TB
    THE BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF CHAMBERSBURG AND SHIPPENSBURG INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $199k · revenue +228%
  • CC
    CIVIC CLUB OF SHIPPENSBURG
    9× · 2017–2025 · $152k · revenue +65%

Funded once

  • CC
    CARLISLE CARESgraduated
    one grant, 2025 · $11k · revenue +262%

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
Quakertown Volunteer Fire Co No 1

Fire fighting services

Public Safety & Disaster
2
Shippenville-Elk Twp Volunteer Fire Department

Fire fighting, rescue and other emergency services

Public Safety & Disaster
3
Perkiomen Twp Fire Co No 1

Volunteer fire fighting

Public Safety & Disaster
4
Penn Volunteer Fire Department

All volunteer fire department provides fire and rescue services to the surrounding communities.

5
Stewartsville Chamblissburg Vfc Inc

We are a volunteer fire company and EMS service to our community. Founded in 1959, our organizations serves over 4,000 homes.

6
North Franklin Township Volunteer Fire Company

Volunteer Fire Company

Public Safety & Disaster
7
Upper Saucon Vol Fire Dept No 1

Fire & Rescue Company

Public Safety & Disaster
8
Hampden-Sydney Volunteer Fire Dept

To protect the lives and property of the citizens and visitors of Hampden-Sydney and surrounding counties as requested.

9
Penn Forest Township Volunteer Fire Co No 1

Volunteer firefighting and emergency services

Public Safety & Disaster
10
Kennett Fire Co No1

Firefighting services.

Public Safety & Disaster
11
Collegeville Fire Company

Volunteer firefighting

12
Salisbury Fire Company No 2 Inc

To provide quality fire fighting and emergency services to general public as well as education on fire prevention.

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Carlisle Cares and the most unlike its peers is Domestic Violence Services of Cumberland & Perry Counties. 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

12 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 12 of the 17 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
11/12
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

CIVIC CLUB OF SHIPPENSBURG — $152,000 · OtherCIVIC CLUB OF SHIPPENSBURGJESUS LOVES YOU MINISTRIES INC — $131,887 · OtherJESUS LOVES YOU MINISTRIES INCTHE SALVATION ARMY — $29,000 · OtherTHE SALVATION ARMYMISCELLANEOUS — $27,604 · OtherMISCELLANEOUSSHAPE — $23,500 · OtherSHAPEVigilant Hose Company No 1 — $22,000 · OtherWEST END FIRE & RESCUE COMPANY NO 3 — $22,000 · OtherCumberland Valley Hose Company No 2 — $16,500 · Other+1 more — $13,250 · OtherSHIPPENSBURG PRODUCE AND OUTREACH — $217,887 · Food & NutritionSHIPPENSBURG PRODUCE…THE BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF CHAMBERSBURG AND SHIPPENSBURG INC — $198,550 · Youth DevelopmentTHE BOYS AND GIRLS C…KATIE'S PLACE OF SHIPPENSBURG INC — $16,500 · Youth DevelopmentKATIE'S PLACE OF SHI…SHIPPENSBURG PUBLIC LIBRARY — $150,500 · EducationSHIPPENSBURG P…American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches — $55,000 · Human ServicesDOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES OF CUMBERLAND & PERRY COUNTIES — $38,700 · Human ServicesCHRIST AMONG NEIGHBORS — $90,075 · Community ImprovementCARLISLE CARES — $11,000 · Housing & Shelter
Other$437,741Food & Nutrition$217,887Youth Development$215,050Education$150,500Human Services$93,700Community Improvement$90,075Housing & Shelter$11,000

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 budgetSHIPPENSBURG PRODUCE AND OUTREACH — $217,887 over 9y, 28% of budgetTHE BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF CHAMBERSBURG AND SHIPPENSBURG INC — $198,550 over 9y, 11% of budgetCIVIC CLUB OF SHIPPENSBURG — $152,000 over 9y, 11% of budgetSHIPPENSBURG PUBLIC LIBRARY — $150,500 over 9y, 2.3% of budgetCHRIST AMONG NEIGHBORS — $90,075 over 9y, 11% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches — $55,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetDOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES OF CUMBERLAND & PERRY COUNTIES — $38,700 over 6y, 0.7% of budgetVigilant Hose Company No 1 — $22,000 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetWEST END FIRE & RESCUE COMPANY NO 3 — $22,000 over 4y, 1.1% of budgetKATIE'S PLACE OF SHIPPENSBURG INC — $16,500 over 3y, 2.1% of budgetCumberland Valley Hose Company No 2 — $16,500 over 3y, 1.7% 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.

  • Who funds SHIPPENSBURG PRODUCE AND OUTREACH
  • Who funds THE BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF CHAMBERSBURG AND SHIPPENSBURG INC
  • Who funds CIVIC CLUB OF SHIPPENSBURG
  • Who funds SHIPPENSBURG PUBLIC LIBRARY
  • Who funds CHRIST AMONG NEIGHBORS
  • Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches
  • Who funds DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES OF CUMBERLAND & PERRY COUNTIES
  • Who funds Vigilant Hose Company No 1
  • Who funds WEST END FIRE & RESCUE COMPANY NO 3
  • Who funds KATIE'S PLACE OF SHIPPENSBURG INC
  • Who funds Cumberland Valley Hose Company No 2
  • Who funds CARLISLE CARES

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.

Carl L and Glenda T Cramer Charitable FoundationPA26.4× affinity10 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Carl L and Glenda T Cramer Charitable Foundation · Partnership for Better Health · Stewart Alexander Md Fdn Tr Udeed · Elmer E Naugle Foundation 001531 · Central Pennsylvania Food Bank · Hosfeld R and M K Memorial Ta · The Foundation for Enhancing Communities · 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 United Way of the Shippensburg Area 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
202122232425
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%your 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
    7report 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, FY2025

    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 17 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph