Skip to content
The Wright Center Medical Group at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

The Wright Center Medical Group

(see on schedule o)

$1.2M
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$135k
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$2.5MPhilanthropy$1.1MHuman Services$862kEducation$230kHousing & Shelter$16kCommunity Improvement$7k
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 6 grants below total $387,327, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,188,022 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $800,695 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $63k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $318k
$57,391
Median grant
1
States reached
$46M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
The Pennsylvania State University$134,525
The Wright Center for Graduate Medical Education$126,000
Patient Engagement Council$57,391
Maternal & Family Health Services$49,308
Outreach Center for Community Resources$13,436
America250PA$6,667
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 (FY19–25, $834k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, 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%TELESPOND SENIOR SERVICES: $294k → 13%TELESPOND SENIOR SERVICES: $197k → 13%TELESPOND SENIOR SERVICES: $152k → 13%OUTREACH CENTER FOR COMMUNITY RESOURCES: $53k → 13%OUTREACH - CENTER FOR COMMUNITY RESOURCES: $35k → 13%OUTREACH - CENTER FOR COMMUNITY RESOURCES: $31k → 13%OUTREACH CENTER FOR COMMUNITY RESOURCES: $20k → 13%The Institute For Public Policy and Economic Development: $8k → 15%OUTREACH CENTER FOR COMMUNITY RESOURCES: $19k → 13%Outreach Center for Community Resources: $13k → 13%Outreach Center for Community Resources: $13k → 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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$4.4M · 10 repeat orgs$308k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +55% since the first grant, against +6% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 5 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

10
11

Total granted

$4.4M
$301k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+55%
+6%

Still filing today

70%
36%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7k 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
HealthHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • MF
    MATERNAL & FAMILY HEALTH SERVICES INC
    7× · 2019–2025 · $1.2M · revenue +55%
  • TW
    The Wright Center for Graduate Medical Education
    6× · 2020–2025 · $704k · revenue +32%
  • TS
    TELESPOND SENIOR SERVICES INC
    3× · 2021–2023 · $643k · revenue +81%

Funded once

  • TW
    The Wright Center Alliance
    one grant, 2024 · $110k
  • NM
    NATIVITY MIGUEL SCRANTON
    one grant, 2023 · $38k
  • U
    UPMC
    one grant, 2021 · $34k
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
The Wright Center Medical Group

(see on schedule o)

Religion
2
Northeastern Pennsylvania Health Care Foundation
Education
3
Highmark Health Group

Working as an integrated system within highmark health, employees at all of ahn's care sites, including hospitals, health + wellness pavilions, primary and specialty care offices and more, are committed to improving health and promoting…

—
4
Geisinger Wyoming Valley Medical Center

Strive to make better health easier by providing access to affordable, high quality health services through equitable, innovative, and inclusive care models that support patient care, education, research, & community service.

Health
5
Lehigh Valley Physician Group

Establish and maintain a medical group consisting of clinicians employed by lehigh valley health network. this medical group will fulfill the charitable mission of promoting community health through health education, injury prevention, and…

Health
6
Upmc Pinnacle Hospitals

Upmc pinnacle hospitals mission as a charitable organization is dedicatied to maintaining and improving the health and quality of life for all persons of the central pennsylvania area.

Health
7
Philadelphia Health Partnership
Health
8
Penn State Health

Penn state health's mission is to continually improve the health and well-being of the people of pennsylvania, and beyond. the organization provides patients with excellent, compassionate and equitable care; educates and trains (continued…

Health
9
Geisinger Medical Center

Strive to make better health easier by providing access to affordable, high quality health services through equitable, innovative, and inclusive care models that support patient care, education, research, & community services.

Health
10
Community Medical Center

Strive to make better health easier by providing access to affordable, high quality health services through equitable, innovative, and inclusive care models that support patient care, education, research, and community service.

Health
11
Pinnacle Health Medical Services

Pinnacle health medical services is a charitable organization dedicated to maintaining and improving the health and quality of life for all the people of central pennsylvania by providing primary, clinic, family and specialty physician…

Health
12
Trihealth Physician Institute

Provides the community necessary medical care through specialty physicians.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Wright Center Alliance; the most unlike its peers is The Institute. 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 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. 12 of the 22 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
8/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MATERNAL & FAMILY HEALTH SERVICES INC: $1,226,152 · HealthMATERNAL & FAMILY HEALTH SERVICES INCThe Wright Center for Graduate Medical Education: $703,500 · HealthThe Wright Center for Graduate Medical EducationPatient Engagement Council: $157,391 · HealthPatient Engagement CouncilThe Wright Center Alliance: $109,630 · Health+4 more: $77,139 · HealthUNITED WAY OF WYOMING VALLEY: $1,124,795 · OtherUNITED WAY OF WYOMING VALLEYPENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY: $192,765 · OtherPENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITYCOUNTY OF WAYNE: $115,000 · OtherCOUNTY OF WAYNE+7 more: $158,975 · Other+7 moreTELESPOND SENIOR SERVICES INC: $642,876 · Human ServicesTELESPOND SENIOR SER…OUTREACH - CENTER FOR COMMUNITY RESOURCES: $183,953 · Human ServicesOUTREACH - CENTER FO…+1 more: $7,500 · Human ServicesPhiladelphia Visitor Center Corporation: $6,667 · Community Improvement
Health$2,273,812Other$1,591,535Human Services$834,329Community Improvement$6,667

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 budgetMATERNAL & FAMILY HEALTH SERVICES INC: $1,226,152 over 7y, 2.2% of budgetThe Wright Center for Graduate Medical Education: $703,500 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetTELESPOND SENIOR SERVICES INC: $642,876 over 3y, 22% of budgetOUTREACH - CENTER FOR COMMUNITY RESOURCES: $183,953 over 7y, 1.6% of budgetPatient Engagement Council: $157,391 over 3y, 54% of budgetTREHAB INC: $27,500 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetENDLESS MOUNTAINS HEALTH SYSTEMS INC: $24,639 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWAYNE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWAYNE MEMORIAL COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCommonwealth Dental Care Initiative: $12,500 over 1y, 7.9% of budgetTHE INSTITUTE: $7,500 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetPhiladelphia Visitor Center Corporation: $6,667 over 1y, 0.1% 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 MATERNAL & FAMILY HEALTH SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds The Wright Center for Graduate Medical Education ↗
  • Who funds TELESPOND SENIOR SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds OUTREACH - CENTER FOR COMMUNITY RESOURCES ↗
  • Who funds Patient Engagement Council ↗
  • Who funds TREHAB INC ↗
  • Who funds ENDLESS MOUNTAINS HEALTH SYSTEMS INC ↗
  • Who funds WAYNE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL ↗
  • Who funds WAYNE MEMORIAL COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS ↗
  • Who funds Commonwealth Dental Care Initiative ↗
  • Who funds THE INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds Philadelphia Visitor Center Corporation ↗

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 for…Moses Taylor Foundati…Scranton Area Foundat…The Hawk Family Found…Allone FoundationThe Honesdale Nationa…Allone CharitiesDonor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
The Wright Center for Graduate Medical EducationPA15.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Wright Center for Graduate Medical Education · Moses Taylor Foundation Inc · Scranton Area Foundation Inc · The Hawk Family Foundation · Allone Foundation · The Honesdale National Bank Foundation · Allone Charities · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Wright Center Medical Group funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Wright Center Medical Group. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    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 22 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 Medical Group’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