· Private foundation
Elizabeth C Clark Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k7 grants · $39k
- $10k–50k15 grants · $330k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SHENANDOAH VALLEY EQUINE RESCUE NETWORK | $35,000 |
| HUMANE SOCIETY OF SHENANDOAH COUNTY INC | $30,000 |
| VIRGINIA TECH COLLEGE OF VETERINARY MEDICINE | $30,000 |
| SPCA OF WINCHESTER | $30,000 |
| FREDERICK COUNTY ESTHER BOYD ANIMAL SHELTER | $30,000 |
| LEESBURG VETERINARY HOSPITAL BENEVOLENT FOUNDATION INC | $25,000 |
| ANIMAL WELFARE LEAGUE OF JEFFERSON COUNTY | $25,000 |
| HUMANE SOCIETY OF WARREN COUNTY | $25,000 |
| THE CLARKE COUNTY HUMANE FOUNDATION | $20,000 |
| DAKOTA'S DREAM ANIMAL RESCUE | $15,000 |
| RURAL DOG RESCUE | $15,000 |
| FREDERICK COUNTYWINCHESTER LAW ENFORCEMENT FOUNDATION | $15,000 |
| LOUISA HUMANE SOCIETY | $15,000 |
| SHENANDOAH SHEPHERD RESCUE | $10,000 |
| BRIGGS ANIMAL ADOPTION CENTER | $10,000 |
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 (FY20–22, $24k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. 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 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 100% of Elizabeth C Clark Foundation’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, 77% of the giving stays in VA; read by stated purpose it is 0% — 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.
30 repeat relationships — 22 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 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.
Backed again, and grew
- SVSHENANDOAH VALLEY EQUINE RESCUE NETWORK8× · 2018–2025 · $250k · revenue +49% · 67% of their budget
- HSHUMANE SOCIETY OF WARREN COUNTY INC9× · 2017–2025 · $240k · revenue +118%
- THTHE HUMANE SOCIETY OF SHENANDOAH COUNTY VIRGINIA INC9× · 2017–2025 · $230k · revenue +156%
Funded once
- ARANIMAL RESCUE LEAGUE OF CLAIBORNE COUNTYone grant, 2017 · $8k
- THTHE HUMANE SOCIETY OF OAK RIDGE & ANDERSON COUNTYone grant, 2017 · $7k
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.
foster based dog rescue working with shelters to save dogs
Save animals in a county with no animal services
we exist to spay and neuter unwanted pets in our local area trying to find them a home to thrive in until the end of their time
The Humane Society of Union County exists to reduce the number of abused, abandoned, and neglected cats and dogs through rescue, rehabilitation, adoption, and spay and neuter.
To spay and neuter animals and provide shelter
The Humane Society Hardy County strives reduce feral animal populations while enhancing the health of our communities and providing for those animals that may be adopted, a safe, nurturing, and healthy environment.
Rescuing rehabilitating and housing of abandoned and homeless dogs cats and small animals with the mission of finding them new forever homes
Provide animal rescue with humane education and outreach.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Animal Welfare Society of Jefferson County and the most unlike its peers is Warrior Canine Connection Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
14 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. 14 of the 32 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 SHENANDOAH VALLEY EQUINE RESCUE NETWORK ↗
- Who funds HUMANE SOCIETY OF WARREN COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds THE HUMANE SOCIETY OF SHENANDOAH COUNTY VIRGINIA INC ↗
- Who funds CLARKE COUNTY HUMANE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds DAKOTA'S DREAM ANIMAL RESCUEINC ↗
- Who funds Mayberry 4 Paws ↗
- Who funds SURRY ANIMAL RESCUE ↗
- Who funds RURAL DOG RESCUE ↗
- Who funds SHENANDOAH SHEPHERD RESCUE INC ↗
- Who funds ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY OF JEFFERSON COUNTY ↗
- Who funds Leesburg Veterinary Hospital Benevolent Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds WESTIE RESCUE INC ↗
- Who funds WARRIOR CANINE CONNECTION INC ↗
- Who funds Louisa Humane Society ↗
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: Verizon Foundation · Network for Good · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 Elizabeth C Clark Foundation 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.
- Warrior Canine Connection Inc — 5% of income from government
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.