Skip to content
Appalachian Area Agency on Aging at a glance

· Public charity

Appalachian Area Agency on Aging

Pass through agency for senior centers in southern wv.

$8.5M
Granted FY2024still arriving
13
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$1.2M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Human Services$28MFood & Nutrition$1.6M
02FY2024 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$633,518
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
RALEIGH COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING INC$1,160,118
PUTNAM COUNTY AGING PROGRAM INC$829,899
BRAXTON COUNTY SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER INC$763,441
COMMUNITY ACTION OF SOUTH EASTERN WEST VIRGINIA$750,944
MCDOWELL COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING INC$719,585
NICHOLAS COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC$683,238
GREENBRIER COUNTY COMMITTE ON AGING$633,518
CLAY SENIOR AND COMMUNITY SERVICES INC$608,411
COUNCIL ON AGING INC$568,518
MONROE COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING INC$487,014
WEBSTER COUNTY SENIOR CITIZENS INC$478,344
POCAHONTAS COUNTY SENIOR CITIZENS INC$430,502
SUMMERS COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING$419,770
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 (FY17–24, $18.7M) land where the poverty rate runs at 21%, against an area that typically sits at 18%. 84% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 18%MONROE COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING INC: $534k → 15%NICHOLAS COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC: $748k → 19%RALEIGH COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING INC: $1.2M → 20%POCAHONTAS COUNTY SENIOR CITIZENS INC: $431k → 20%SUMMERS COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING: $420k → 23%WEBSTER COUNTY SENIOR CITIZENS INC: $600k → 24%MCDOWELL COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING INC: $723k → 25%MONROE COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING INC: $487k → 15%NICHOLAS COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC: $683k → 19%RALEIGH COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING INC: $1.0M → 20%POCAHONTAS COUNTY SENIOR CITIZENS INC: $421k → 20%SUMMERS COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING: $385k → 23%WEBSTER COUNTY SENIOR CITIZENS INC: $478k → 24%MCDOWELL COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING INC: $720k → 25%MONROE COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING: $478k → 15%GREENBRIER COUNTY: $503k → 18%NICHOLAS COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSH: $533k → 19%RALEIGH COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING: $817k → 20%POCAHONTAS COUNTY SENIOR CITIZENS: $362k → 20%SUMMERS COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING INC: $384k → 23%WEBSTER COUNTY: $405k → 24%MCDOWELL COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING: $555k → 25%MONROE COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING: $445k → 15%GREENBRIER COUNTY: $484k → 18%NICHOLAS COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSH: $503k → 19%RALEIGH COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING: $781k → 20%POCAHONTAS COUNTY SENIOR CITIZENS: $361k → 20%SUMMERS COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING INC: $365k → 23%WEBSTER COUNTY: $391k → 24%MCDOWELL COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING: $534k → 25%COUNCIL ON AGING INC: $569k → 25%COUNCIL ON AGING INC: $512k → 25%COUNCIL ON AGING INC: $459k → 25%COUNCIL ON AGING INC: $454k → 25%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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$30M · 14 repeat orgs$283k to everyone else

14 repeat relationships: 13 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
1

Total granted

$30M
$283k

Still filing today

93%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’23’24
Human ServicesCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitOther
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

  • RC
    RALEIGH COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING INC
    5× · 2017–2025 · $3.8M · revenue +84%
  • PC
    PUTNAM COUNTY AGING PROGRAM INC
    5× · 2017–2025 · $3.1M · revenue +126%
  • CA
    COMMUNITY ACTION OF SOUTH EASTERN WEST VIRGINIA INC
    5× · 2017–2025 · $2.8M · revenue +30%

Funded once

  • GL
    GOSPEL LIGHTHOUSE CHURCH
    one grant, 2023 · $283k
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
Lewis County Senior Citizens Center Inc

Serve the senior citizens of Lewis County, WV

Human Services
2
The Committee on Aging for Randolph County Inc

To provide services to senior citizens.

Human Services
3
Jackson County Council On Aging

Provide services to local seniors to improve their quality of life and assist them in remaining in their homes

Human Services
4
Jackson County Commission On Aging Inc

Establish, conduct, implement, operate, coordinate and finance programs for the benefit of the low income, minority, elderly, disadvantaged and handicapped citizens of jackson county through title iii and medicaid programs.

Human Services
5
Roane County Committee On Aging Inc

To study and document the needs of seniors, to encourage, promote and aid in the establishment of programs for seniors, to conduct programs of public education on programs on aging, to utilize opportunities to establish and implement…

—
6
Council of Senior Citizens of Gilmer County Inc

To study and document the needs of seniors, to encourage, promote and aid in the establishment of programs for seniors, to conduct programs of public education on programs on aging, to utilize opportunities to establish and implement…

Human Services
7
Commission on Aging Family Services Inc

To improve the quality of life of the senior citizens and their famiilies in grant county, west virginia.

Human Services
8
Jefferson County Council On Aging Inc

To provide in home services, para-nursing services, nutritional meals, transportation, and other various services to the elderly of Jefferson and Berkley Counties located in WV.

Human Services
9
Laurel Valley Senior Citizens Center

Operation of three senior citizens centers with approximately 450 seniors citizens thru the Westmoreland County Area Agency on Aging.

—
10
Walton County Senior Citizens Council

Aging services contractor

Human Services
11
Clarion Area Agency on AgingInc

Program Services to Aging Population in Clarion County

Human Services
12
Preston County Senior Citizens Inc

Preston county senior citizens, inc provides public transit services available to all preston county residents, and they provide transportaion, in-home care, nutrition, and other social services to the senior citizens of west virginia.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Raleigh County Commission On Aging Inc; the most unlike its peers is Clay Senior and Community Services Inc. 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

13 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. 13 of the 15 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.

7
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
11/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

RALEIGH COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING INC: $3,780,465 · Human ServicesRALEIGH COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING INCMcDowell County Commission on Aging Inc: $2,531,738 · Human ServicesMcDowell County Commission on Aging IncNICHOLAS COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC: $2,467,350 · Human ServicesNICHOLAS COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INCCOUNCIL ON AGING INC: $1,993,654 · Human ServicesCOUNCIL ON AGING INCMonroe County Council on Aging Inc: $1,944,664 · Human ServicesMonroe County Council on Aging IncWebster County Senior Citizens Inc: $1,873,890 · Human ServicesWebster County Senior Citizens IncPocahontas County Senior Citizens Inc: $1,574,281 · Human ServicesPocahontas County Senior Citizens IncSummers County Council on Aging Inc: $1,553,721 · Human ServicesSummers County Council on Aging IncGREENBRIER COUNTY COMMITTEE ON AGING INC: $986,812 · Human ServicesPUTNAM COUNTY AGING PROGRAM INC: $3,065,365 · OtherPUTNAM COUNTY AGING PROGRA…BRAXTON COUNTY SENIOR CITIZENS: $2,299,286 · OtherBRAXTON COUNTY SENIOR CITI…GREENBRIER COUNTY COMMITTE ON AGING: $1,258,546 · OtherGREENBRIER COUNTY COMMITTE…GOSPEL LIGHTHOUSE CHURCH: $283,443 · OtherCOMMUNITY ACTION OF SOUTH EASTERN WEST VIRGINIA INC: $2,788,963 · Community ImprovementCOMMUNITY …CLAY SENIOR AND COMMUNITY SERVICES INC: $1,579,491 · Public Benefit
Human Services$18,706,575Other$6,906,640Community Improvement$2,788,963Public Benefit$1,579,491

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetRALEIGH COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING INC: $3,780,465 over 5y, 15% of budgetPUTNAM COUNTY AGING PROGRAM INC: $3,065,365 over 5y, 17% of budgetCOMMUNITY ACTION OF SOUTH EASTERN WEST VIRGINIA INC: $2,788,963 over 5y, 6.6% of budgetMcDowell County Commission on Aging Inc: $2,531,738 over 5y, 38% of budgetNICHOLAS COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC: $2,467,350 over 5y, 19% of budgetBRAXTON COUNTY SENIOR CITIZENS: $2,299,286 over 5y, 19% of budgetCOUNCIL ON AGING INC: $1,993,654 over 5y, 10% of budgetMonroe County Council on Aging Inc: $1,944,664 over 5y, 58% of budgetWebster County Senior Citizens Inc: $1,873,890 over 5y, 39% of budgetCLAY SENIOR AND COMMUNITY SERVICES INC: $1,579,491 over 5y, 26% of budgetPocahontas County Senior Citizens Inc: $1,574,281 over 5y, 64% of budgetSummers County Council on Aging Inc: $1,553,721 over 5y, 37% of budgetGREENBRIER COUNTY COMMITTEE ON AGING INC: $986,812 over 2y, 65% 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.

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile Foundation
Amazonsmile FoundationWA1.4× affinity6 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Appalachian Area Agency on Aging funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Appalachian Area Agency on Aging. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    10report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Appalachian Area Agency on Aging?

    Find your warmest path to Appalachian Area Agency on Aging through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 15 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $8.6M of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Appalachian Area Agency on Aging’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