Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Coalfield Water Development Fund

To expedite water development by providing gap financing, encourage regional water system development and local investments in water provision, and address public health problems related to the quantity and quality of water

$572k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$144k
Largest
01What you fund
0195% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Environment$4.3MPublic Benefit$244kHealth$200kRecreation & Sports$60kOther$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $61k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $511k
$75,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$24M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DICKENSON COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE$143,745
Individual grant recipient$92,255
SCOTT COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE$75,000
WISE COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE$75,000
Individual grant recipient$75,000
RUSSELL COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE$50,000
LEE COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY$46,000
Individual grant recipient$15,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 23%, against an area that typically sits at 20%. 70% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 20%TAZEWELL COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $100k → 18%CASTLEWOOD WATER AND SEWAGE AUTHORITY: $63k → 18%SCOTT COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $118k → 20%WISE COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $107k → 22%DICKENSON COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $100k → 23%LEE COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY: $126k → 24%BUCHANAN COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $330k → 27%RUSSELL COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $125k → 18%SCOTT COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY: $110k → 20%CITY OF NORTON: $75k → 22%DICKENSON COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $100k → 23%LEE COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY: $110k → 24%BUCHANAN COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY: $213k → 27%RUSSELL COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $100k → 18%SCOTT COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $110k → 20%WISE COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $75k → 22%DICKENSON COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $80k → 23%LEE COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY: $94k → 24%BUCHANAN COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY: $200k → 27%TOWN OF TAZEWELL: $92k → 18%RUSSELL COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $100k → 18%SCOTT COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY: $96k → 20%WISE COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $70k → 22%DICKENSON COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY: $75k → 23%LEE COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY: $90k → 24%BUCHANAN COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $192k → 27%RUSSELL COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY: $75k → 18%SCOTT COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $79k → 20%WISE COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $40k → 22%LEE COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY: $88k → 24%BUCHANAN COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $100k → 27%RUSSELL COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $50k → 18%SCOTT COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $75k → 20%DICKENSON COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $150k → 23%LEE COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY: $60k → 24%BUCHANAN COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $100k → 27%RUSSELL COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $50k → 18%SCOTT COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $50k → 20%DICKENSON COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $144k → 23%LEE COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY: $60k → 24%BUCHANAN COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $100k → 27%RUSSELL COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $40k → 18%DICKENSON COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $133k → 23%LEE COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY: $46k → 24%BUCHANAN COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $100k → 27%TOWN OF BIG STONE GAP: $75k → 22%DICKENSON COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE: $100k → 23%TOWN OF BIG STONE GAP: $60k → 22%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$4.8M · 9 repeat orgs$258k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
2

Total granted

$4.8M
$75k

Still filing today

0%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 68% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $182k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

  • BC
    BUCHANAN COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE
    7× · 2017–2024 · $1.4M
  • DC
    DICKENSON COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE
    9× · 2017–2025 · $887k
  • LC
    LEE COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY
    8× · 2017–2025 · $673k

Funded once

  • CW
    CASTLEWOOD WATER AND SEWAGE AUTHORITY
    one grant, 2017 · $63k
  • WW
    WOODWAY WATER AUTHORITY
    one grant, 2020 · $12k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field
04the grantee network

0 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 0 of the 14 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
0/0
Grantees still filing
0/0
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

BUCHANAN COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE — $1,378,571 · OtherBUCHANAN COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICEDICKENSON COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE — $887,445 · OtherDICKENSON COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICELEE COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY — $673,240 · OtherLEE COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITYSCOTT COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE — $637,980 · OtherSCOTT COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICERUSSELL COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE — $540,000 · OtherRUSSELL COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICEWISE COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE — $296,602 · OtherWISE COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE+8 more — $596,265 · Other+8 more
Other$5,010,103

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ your share of their budget
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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Coalfield Water Development Fund?

Find your warmest path to Coalfield Water Development Fund 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 14 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph