Loading…
Loading…
· Public charity
Pass through agency for senior centers in southern wv.
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2018–2024.
Your grants by size, and where they go.
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY18–24, $14.3M) land where the poverty rate runs at 21% — the area typically sits at 18%. 86% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. 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 line in 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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
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 +16% since the first grant, against +7% for the ones you funded once.
13 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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.
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.
Provide various services for the elderly
Preston county senior citizens, inc provides transportation, in-home care, nutrition, training and job assistance and other social services to the senior citizens of west virginia.
To provide in home services, para-nursing in home services, nutritional meals, transportation, and other various services to elderly of Jefferson and Berkley Counties in WV.
Organization operates a senior citizens center in barbour county west virginia. senior citizens are provided with transportation, nutrition, in-home care and personal and social services.
To improve the qualiry of life of the senior citizens and their famiilies in grant county, west virginia.
Provide homemaker and case management services to home-bound seniors and disabled members in west virginia. provide, also, training and job assistance to those 55 and older on a limited income.
To provide services for senior citizens in knox county
To improve the quality of life for those 60 and over in Hardin County.
The Council on Aging provides essential services to our senior community through an integrated network of programs working together to fulfill our clients' needs. We currently have 12 programs including: Meals on Wheels, Senior Dining…
To improve the quality of life for senior citizens in upshur county, west virginia
Provide various services for elderly
Provides senior center and congregate and home delivered meals, homemaker services allowing seniors to remain in their homes.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Raleigh County Commission On Aging Inc and the most unlike its peers is Community Action of South Eastern. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
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
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.
Open a dossier: 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.
Every dot is one organisation APPALACHIAN AREA AGENCY ON AGING 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. 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.
Through Plinth
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: GREENBRIER COUNTY.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
~12 months of operating runway; revenue held over 7 filed years.
7 years of Form 990 filings, still active.
US 501(c)(3); EIN 550553281 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on GREENBRIER COUNTY, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
Find your warmest path to Appalachian Area Agency on Aging through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.