· Private foundation
Ann C and Robert O Orders Jr Family Foundation Inc
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
Read this first · the figures below need context
63% of Ann C and Robert O Orders Jr Family Foundation Inc’s FY2025 grant dollars went to The Greater Kanawha Valley Foundation, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 10 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2024, the last year Ann C and Robert O Orders Jr Family Foundation Inc named its own grantees at scale: 11 organizations, $175k. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 56% of ANN C AND ROBERT O ORDERS JR FAMILY FOUNDATION INC’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k8 grants · $40k
- $10k–50k9 grants · $135k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| HABITAT FOR HUMANITY NRV | $40,000 |
| WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| YAMPA VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| THE GREATER KANAWHA VALLEY FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $10,000 |
| SOUTH CAROLINA AQUARIUM | $10,000 |
| WEST VIRGINIA LAND TRUST | $10,000 |
| CENTRAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL | $10,000 |
| CHARLESTON MOVES | $10,000 |
| SECOND PRESBYTERIAN PRESCHOOL & KINDERGARTEN | $5,000 |
| WEST VIRGINIA SCENIC TRAILS ASSOCIATION | $5,000 |
| HEART OF THE HIGHLANDS TRAIL SYSTEM | $5,000 |
| GREENBRIER RIVER TRIAL ASSOCIATION | $5,000 |
| NEIGHBORS TOGETHER | $5,000 |
| CHARLESTON ANIMAL SOCIETY | $5,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY23–25, $13k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 15% of Ann C and Robert O Orders Jr Family Foundation Inc’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, 75% of the giving stays in WV; read by stated purpose it is 71% — 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 +64% since the first grant, against -5% for the ones you funded once.
17 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call). Read against FY2024, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
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 FY2025, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
- SCSouth Carolina Aquarium6× · 2020–2025 · $60k · revenue +64%
- TWTHE WEST VIRGINIA LAND TRUST INC4× · 2019–2025 · $56k · revenue +110%
- CMCharleston Moves4× · 2022–2025 · $55k · revenue +76%
Funded once
- TNTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY OF WVone grant, 2017 · $500k
- LFLIBRARY FOUNDATION OF KANAWHA COUNTY INCone grant, 2018 · $100k · revenue -74%
- CSCAWV SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATIONone grant, 2017 · $50k
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 promote sustainable economic development by facilitating reuse of commercial, industrial, and mining sites and providing long-term management of key risks from legacy environmental concerns.
The virginia capital trail foundation exists to protect, promote, and enhance the virginia capital trail and engage communities around it.
Promoting for the benefit of the general public, the preservation, protection and enjoyment of our natural resources, principally in the lower james, york, rappahannock and chowan rivers and surrounding watersheds.
To operate as ltv for the purpose of promoting the preservation, protection and balanced use of natural, scenic, and historic resources in the commonwealth of virginia through conservation easements and ownership.
The mission of the james river association is to be guardian of the james river. we provide a voice for the river and take action to promote conservation and responsible stewardship of its natural resources.
The wvnpa is a membership association dedicated to serving west virginia's nonprofit sector by providing year-round programming, serving as a clearing house of information, tools and resources through our website, and connect the sector…
The endowment's mission is to improve the quality of the environment by using its capital, expertise, and resources to fund projects and programs that encourage all sectors to work together to prevent pollution, improve water quality,…
To assist rural virginians in developing and advancing their agricultural, economic and social interests to enhance their quality of life.
To promote safe and healthy waters for all in west virginia, primarily through water policy advocacy. the organization provides public education and informational resources.
West virginia community action partnership is an alliance of community action agencies that supports and strengthens our members, advocates for low-income and families and promotes partnerships.
Protecting and connecting virginia's wild places.
Protect land along rivers, lakes and wetlands of vt; protect public access, wildlife habitat, scenic natural beauty, and ecological integrity.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is West Virginia University Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Charleston Moves. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
21 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. 21 of the 41 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 THE GREATER KANAWHA VALLEY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LIBRARY FOUNDATION OF KANAWHA COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC OF THE NEW RIVE ↗
- Who funds South Carolina Aquarium ↗
- Who funds THE WEST VIRGINIA LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds Charleston Moves ↗
- Who funds NEW RIVER COMMUNITY ACTION INC ↗
- Who funds YAMPA VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds VALLEY INTERFAITH CHILD CARE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds CHARLESTON ANIMAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds KANAWHA STATE FOREST FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds WEST VIRGINIA SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA INC ↗
- Who funds NEW RIVER LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds WEST VIRGINIA SCENIC TRAILS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds Neighbors Together Inc ↗
- Who funds CLAY CENTER FOR THE ARTS & SCIENCES OF WV INC ↗
- Who funds LOWCOUNTRY ORPHAN RELIEF ↗
- Who funds BACKPACK BUDDIES SEABROOK ISLAND ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF CENTRAL WEST VIRGINIA ↗
- Who funds FUND FOR THE ARTS ↗
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: The Greater Kanawha Valley Foundation · Truist West Virginia Foundation Inc · Encova Foundation of West Virginia · The West Virginia Humanities Council Inc · Tgkvf Inc · Blue Grass Community Foundation Inc · American Water Charitable Foundationinc · The Strong-Treister Family Foundation · Claude Worthington Benedum Foundation · Dominion Energy Charitable Foundation · Enterprise Holdings Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program
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 Ann C and Robert O Orders Jr Family Foundation Inc 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.
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.