Skip to content
The Wright Center for Graduate Medical Education at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

The Wright Center for Graduate Medical Education

(see on schedule o)

$2.2M
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$1.1M
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, FY2019 to 2025.

Health$4.7MPhilanthropy$517kEducation$230kCommunity Improvement$71kHuman Services$6kCrime & Legal$5k
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $71k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $238k
  • $250k+3 grants · $1.9M
$72,561
Median grant
5
States reached
$38M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
The Wright Center Medical Group$1,090,426
Scranton Area Foundation$500,000
Wayne Memorial Community Health Centers$268,645
Unity Healthcare INC$101,531
Health Point CHC$72,561
Health Source of Ohio$64,325
America250PA$36,000
El Rio Health$34,592
Hospice of the Sacred Heart$7,500
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 (FY24–25, $21k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%The Institute For Public Policy and Economic Development: $6k → 15%Hospice of the Sacred Heart: $8k → 13%Hospice of the Sacred Heart: $8k → 13%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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$4.8M · 9 repeat orgs$240k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +12% since the first grant, against +7% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
9

Total granted

$4.8M
$104k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+12%
+7%

Still filing today

100%
89%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $136k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthEducationCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesReligionCrime & LegalOther
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

  • TW
    The Wright Center Medical Group
    3× · 2020–2025 · $3.4M · revenue +102%
  • WM
    WAYNE MEMORIAL COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS
    2× · 2024–2025 · $382k · revenue +19%
  • AT
    A T Still University of Health Sciences
    4× · 2019–2022 · $278k · revenue +43%

Funded once

  • NM
    NATIVITY MIGUEL SCRANTON
    one grant, 2023 · $38k
  • ST
    SCRANTON TOMORROW
    one grant, 2023 · $18k · revenue -17%
  • CD
    Commonwealth Dental Care Initiative
    one grant, 2023 · $13k · revenue -100%
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
Upmc Western Maryland Corporation

The mission of upmc western maryland is to serve our community by providing outstanding patient care and to shape tomorrow's health system through clinical & technological innovation, research and education.

Health
2
Upmc Williamsport

UPMC Williamsport is a subsidiary of UPMC Susquehanna. The mission of UPMC Susquehanna and its subsidiaries is to serve the community by providing outstanding patient care and shaping tomorrow's health care through clinical and…

Health
3
Pocono Health System

We heal, comfort and care for the people of our community by providing advanced and compassionate health care of superior quality and value supported by education and clinical research.

—
4
Highmark Health

As the parent entity of a blended health organization, highmark health seeks to improve the health and well-being of the people and communities it serves by providing affordable, accessible and high-quality healthcare.

Health
5
Penn Highlands Healthcare Inc

Our community-based and controlled health care system exists to improve regional access to a wide array of premier primary care and advanced health services while supporting a reverence for life and the worth and dignity of each individual.

Health
6
University Hospital & Clinics Inc

The organization provides medical care to improve, maintain, and restore the health of the people in the communities we serve.

Health
7
Monongahela Valley Hospital Inc

The mission of penn highlands mon valley is to enhance the health of the residents of the mid-monongahela valley area by providing outstanding healthcare services.

Health
8
Susquehanna Physician Services

Susquehanna physician services is a subsidiary of the exempt entity upmc suquehanna. our vision is to create an integrated community health system that delivers world class care. our values are to carefully place our patients and their…

Health
9
Lehigh Valley Health Network

We heal, comfort, and care for the people of our community by providing advanced and compassionate health care of superior quality and value supported by education and clinical research.

—
10
Union Health System

To serve our communities by provding innovative and compassionate healthcare.

Health
11
Scranton Primary Health Care Center

The center provides comprehensive health and dental services for residents of scranton pa and other communities in lackawanna and surrounding counties.

Health
12
Penn State Health Hampden Medical Center

Penn state health hampden medical center's mission is to continually improve the health and well-being of the people in pennsylvania. the organization provides patients with excellent, compassionate and culturally responsive and equitable…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Healthsource of Ohio Inc; the most unlike its peers is A T Still University of Health Sciences. 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

20 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. 20 of the 21 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
11/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

The Wright Center Medical Group: $3,411,322 · ReligionThe Wright Center Medical GroupWAYNE MEMORIAL COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS: $381,687 · HealthWAYNE MEMORIAL COMMUN…WYCKOFF HEIGHTS MEDICAL CENTER: $338,923 · HealthWYCKOFF HEIGHTS MEDIC…HEALTHPOINT: $162,086 · HealthHEALTHPOINTUNITY HEALTH CARE INC: $101,531 · HealthUNITY HEALTH CARE INCEL RIO SANTA CRUZ NEIGHBORHOOD HEALTH CENTER INC: $34,592 · Health+1 more: $12,500 · HealthSCRANTON AREA FOUNDATION INC: $506,500 · PhilanthropySCRANTON A…+1 more: $5,000 · PhilanthropyA T Still University of Health Sciences: $277,849 · EducationWILKES UNIVERSITY: $18,000 · Education+2 more: $10,350 · EducationHealthsource of Ohio Inc: $151,905 · OtherNATIVITY MIGUEL SCRANTON: $37,500 · OtherUNITED WAY OF LACKAWANNA WAYNE AND PIKE COUNTIES: $10,000 · OtherPhiladelphia Visitor Center Corporation: $53,167 · Community ImprovementSCRANTON TOMORROW: $17,500 · Community ImprovementHOSPICE OF THE SACRED HEART: $15,000 · Human ServicesTHE INSTITUTE: $6,000 · Human ServicesLACKAWANNA PRO BONO INC: $5,000 · Crime & Legal
Religion$3,411,322Health$1,031,319Philanthropy$511,500Education$306,199Other$199,405Community Improvement$70,667Human Services$21,000Crime & Legal$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetThe Wright Center Medical Group: $3,411,322 over 3y, 3.3% of budgetSCRANTON AREA FOUNDATION INC: $506,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWAYNE MEMORIAL COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS: $381,687 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetWYCKOFF HEIGHTS MEDICAL CENTER: $338,923 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetA T Still University of Health Sciences: $277,849 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetHEALTHPOINT: $162,086 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHealthsource of Ohio Inc: $151,905 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetPhiladelphia Visitor Center Corporation: $53,167 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetWILKES UNIVERSITY: $18,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSCRANTON TOMORROW: $17,500 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetHOSPICE OF THE SACRED HEART: $15,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCommonwealth Dental Care Initiative: $12,500 over 1y, 7.9% of budgetUNITED WAY OF LACKAWANNA WAYNE AND PIKE COUNTIES: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHE INSTITUTE: $6,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetGEISINGER COMMONWEALTH SCH OF MED: $5,350 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINTEND HEALTH STRATEGIES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMarywood University: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLACKAWANNA PRO BONO INC: $5,000 over 1y, 1.5% 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.

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.

The Wright Center Med…Moses Taylor Foundati…Scranton Area Foundat…Ppl FoundationNortheastern Pennsylv…Robert H Spitz Founda…The Hawk Family Found…The Honesdale Nationa…Benco Family Foundati…Allone CharitiesWilliam G McGowan Cha…The Harry and Jeanett…
The Wright Center Medical GroupPA15.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 10 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Wright Center Medical Group · Moses Taylor Foundation Inc · Scranton Area Foundation Inc · Ppl Foundation · Northeastern Pennsylvania Health Care Foundation · Robert H Spitz Foundation · The Hawk Family Foundation · The Honesdale National Bank Foundation · Benco Family Foundation Fka Cohen Family Charitable Foundation · Allone Charities · William G McGowan Charitable Fund · The Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation Inc

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 Wright Center for Graduate Medical Education funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Wright Center for Graduate Medical Education. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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 · 0–40%
    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 21 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 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 Wright Center for Graduate Medical Education’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