· Public charity
Western Pennsylvania Conservancy
The WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY protects and restores exceptional places to provide our region with clean waters and healthy forests, wildlife and natural areas for the benefit of present and future generations.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 1 grants below total $21,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $51,802 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $30,802 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.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| LAWRENCE COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER | $21,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 80% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 45% of Western Pennsylvania Conservancy’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 92% of the giving stays in PA; read by stated purpose it is 49% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +162% since the first grant, against +23% for the ones you funded once.
13 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2024, 13 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $21k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- SWSTROUD WATER RESEARCH CENTER3× · 2020–2022 · $385k · revenue +79%
- AFALLIANCE FOR THE CHESAPEAKE BAY INC4× · 2018–2021 · $174k · revenue +169%
- FCFRENCH CREEK VALLEY CONSERVANCY3× · 2018–2020 · $51k · revenue +162%
Funded once
- URURBAN REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF PITTSBURGHone grant, 2018 · $2.0M
- PGPROPAGATE GROUP PBCone grant, 2022 · $192k
- JBJENNERSTOWN BOROUGHone grant, 2018 · $183k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
To conserve and restore the natural resources through land conservation, water resources stewardship and environmental outreach across central pennsylvania.
Watershed conservation & protection
The mission of Central Pennsylvania Conservancy (CPC) is to acquire, preserve, and protect local land and natural resources in a five-county, South-Central PA region. Our vision is to create a local network of permanently protected and…
Our mission is conserving West Michigans ecologically critical land. We protect land by creating public nature preserves, providing support to communities and local governments in creating natural areas, and helping private landowners…
The Allegheny County Conservation District is an urban conservation district that engages and leads through partnerships, innovation, and implementation to conserve, promote, and improve Allegheny Countys natural resources.
Protect land along rivers, lakes and wetlands of vt; protect public access, wildlife habitat, scenic natural beauty, and ecological integrity.
To serve as a steward for the natural and cultural communities in the upper Penns Creek Watershed. We seek to preserve and Honor the agricultural roots of Penns Valley by protecting and conserving its waters, farmland, forests and rural…
To support, encourage and promote the enjoyment, restoration, conservation, protection and prudent management of the natural resources of the chester, ridley, and crum watersheds
The Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council is a local nonprofit organization that strives to enhance and restore habitat for fish and wildlife our community and for future generations. Our Board of Directors consists of seven members with…
To promote the conservation of the Swatara Watersheds natural resources through scientific research, education, and conservation projects. This is accomplished by conducting investigations, providing information sponsoring projects, and…
The chesapeake audubon society works in the maryland region to promote the stewardship of natural ecosystems through conservation, restoration, education, and advocacy.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is French Creek Valley Conservancy and the most unlike its peers is Fairmount Park Conservancy. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
14 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. 14 of the 46 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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 STROUD WATER RESEARCH CENTER ↗
- Who funds ALLIANCE FOR THE CHESAPEAKE BAY INC ↗
- Who funds CONEMAUGH VALLEY CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds FRENCH CREEK VALLEY CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds CHESAPEAKE CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds AUDUBON SOCIETY OF WESTERN PA ↗
- Who funds SCHUYLKILL HEADWATERS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds FAIRMOUNT PARK CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds NatureServe ↗
- Who funds HORN FARM CENTER FOR AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds LOYALHANNA WATERSHED ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds OCTORARO WATERSHED ASSOCIATION ↗
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.
Open a dossier: National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Foundation for Pennsylvania Watersheds · Richard King Mellon Foundation · Lancaster County Community Foundation · The Pittsburgh Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Western Pennsylvania Conservancy 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.
- Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay Inc — 28% of income from government
- Chesapeake Conservancy Inc — 27% of income from government
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.