Loading…
Loading…
Pennsylvania · Nonprofit
THE PRINT CENTER (Pennsylvania) is funded by 26 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $1,832,661 in grants to it, the largest being THE WILLIAM PENN FOUNDATION ($737,750). 18 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Revenue, expenses and net assets — each indexed to 100 at its first filing year, so you read the trajectory, not the magnitude.
The funding model — what share of revenue comes from contributions, programs, investments and other sources — and whether it's shifting.
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 3 of the last 7 reported years ran a deficit.
The base broadened — 2 funders to 3 as grant income moved $28k → $34k.
4 of 26 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 28% of grant dollars received. That money is really individual donors directing a sponsor; the institutions to cultivate are the non-DAF funders.
From the IRS filings of THE PRINT CENTER’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
THE PRINT CENTER leans on a few funders — its largest provides 40% of grant income and the top three 73%; half comes from just 2 funders.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 2 funders to its left
Largest funder’s share by year: 2017 89% · 2018 55% · 2019 53% · 2020 74% · 2021 32% · 2022 46% · 2023 42% · 2024 45% · 2025 56% — diversifying over time.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
58% of THE PRINT CENTER's funders are still giving 3 years after their first grant; 69% give in more than one year at all.
Share of funders still giving k years after their first recorded grant, pooled across every acquisition cohort. A funder counts as retained in a year only if it made a grant that year.
THE PRINT CENTER is locally rooted: 88% of its grant income comes from Pennsylvania funders.
In-state vs out-of-state, by year
Grantmakers that don’t fund you yet, surfaced two ways: they back organizations that share your funders, or their grantees resemble your mission. The ones both signals agree on come first. Your 26 funders put you under-funded among the 400 organizations that share them.
From the co-funder graph (funders backing at least two comparable organizations, shrunk for grantee count, donor-advised and mega-funds excluded) and the universe embeddings. A research starting point; overlap is association, not a guarantee of fit.
Grants and contracts to this organization from federal (USASpending) and state checkbooks, reconciled to its EIN. $47k on record — $30k federal, $17k state.
Federal grants vs contracts are distinguished; state line items keep their reported category. Matched by name + geography (the BMF), so coverage is partial and precision-first.
Nonprofits whose mission and program text most resemble this one, by semantic similarity over the universe of US filings — the closest peers, and often the clearest route to shared or prospective funders.
Read directly from this organization’s own Form 990, as neutral context.
66% of spending goes to programs.
88%
Share of support from the public (Schedule A) — the basis for its public-charity status.
Operates in 1 state
Every figure is read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML — this organization’s own return for FY2024 (financials across 2018–2024), and the filings of 26funders that report grants to it. “On record” means captured in the filings we have parsed — a funder that does not e-file, or whose grant detail is not itemized, will not appear. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind. view filing