Loading…
· Public charity
KANAWHA VALLEY COLLECTIVE INC
The kanawha valley collective is a collaborative network dedicated to preventing and eridicating homelessness by improving homeless services and removing barriers to housing in kanawha, boone, clay and putnam counties.
$1.5M
Granted FY2023
8
Grants
1
Communities
$613k
Largest
01What you fund
01
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 50% of KANAWHA VALLEY COLLECTIVE INC’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.
02beneath the categories
Past the labels — and the year it shifted
Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.
…and in their own words, year by year
2020
salaries centralizedcentralized pointpoint entryentry stabilization
2021
salaries centralizedcentralized pointpoint entryentry stabilization
2022
salaries centralizedcentralized pointpoint entryentry stabilization
2023
pass wvdhhrpass greater
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2023 · 8 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2023
- Under $10k1 grant · $8k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $45k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $113k
- $250k+3 grants · $1.3M
$112,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$841k
Total assets
Largest grants
- UNION MISSION MINISTRIES INC$612,500
- CLARKSBURG MISSIONS INC$362,500
- HUNTINGTON CITY MISSION$362,500
- UNION RESCUE MISSION INC$112,500
- YWCA CHARLESTON$15,125
- BREAM$15,125
- DAYMARK INC$15,125
- RELIGIOUS COALITION FOR COMMUNITY RENEWAL$7,870
02The need
04
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:
Your human-services grants (FY20–23, $234k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17% — the area typically sits at 15%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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 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.
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.
13%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$212k · 4 repeat orgs$1.5M to everyone else
4 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2023, 2 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
4
6
Total granted
$212k
$1.5M
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+24%
+59%
Still filing today
75%
67%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2023, 2% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.5M went to new ones.
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
- YCYWCA CHARLESTON4× · 2020–2023 · $61k · revenue +22%
- DIDAYMARK INC4× · 2020–2023 · $61k · revenue +71%
- CHCOVENANT HOUSE3× · 2020–2022 · $45k · revenue +24%
Funded once
- UMUNION MISSION MINISTRIES INCone grant, 2023 · $613k · revenue -10%
- CMCLARKSBURG MISSIONS INCone grant, 2023 · $363k · revenue -9% · 38% of their budget
- HCHUNTINGTON CITY MISSIONone grant, 2023 · $363k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
04Your field
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.
1
The Union Mission
The union mission seeks to be a leader in gospel transforming ministry in hampton roads, providing a pathway to success for our homeless guests. we act to restore the lives of homeless neighbors by caring like christ.
Human Services
2
Martinsburg Union Rescue Mission Inc
To provide housing, food and religious counseling for the needy and underprivileged.
Housing & Shelter
3
Union Mission of Roanoke Rapids
Service to the needy through shelter, meals, clothing and food distribution.
Human Services
4
Union Gospel Mission
To follow christ in helping people move from homelessness to wholeness.
—
5
United Community Ministries Inc
Providing food & shelter to the homeless and transitioning the homeless toward permanent independence in housing.
Human Services
6
Cornerstone Rescue Mission
Provide shelter, food, clothing, gospel, social service referrals, and assistance to the homeless.
—
7
Union Rescue Mission
The union rescue mission serves the forgotten, abused, and addicted by providing an environment where the love and compassion of jesus christ helps people overcome life difficulties
Housing & Shelter
8
Trinity Community Ministries Inc
Help homeless men regain control of their lives and return to their communities as mentors and leaders.
Housing & Shelter
9
Union Rescue Mission
We embrace people experiencing homelessness with the compassion of christ - giving hope and healing for a changed life - helping them find their way home.
Human Services
10
Rome Rescue Mission Inc
A christian organization to provide a means of hope by giving shelter to the homeless, feeding the poor and promoting a personal relationship with god to all individuals and families.
Housing & Shelter
11
Urban Mission Ministries Inc
Founded in 1959, the urban mission lives out its commitment to the community in the following ways:-we utilize food, shelter, and other essential services as a tool to build trust, eliminate barriers and bring healing and restoration for…
—
12
Orange County Rescue Mission Inc
To minister the love of Jesus Christ to the Least, the Last, and the Lost of our Community through the provision of assistance in the areas of guidance, counseling, education, job training, shelter, food, clothing, health care and…
Housing & Shelter
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Union Mission Ministries Inc and the most unlike its peers is Clarksburg Mission Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network
8 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Human Services$846,000Other$838,745
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.
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.
Encova Foundation of West VirginiaWV20.3× affinity7 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: Encova Foundation of West Virginia · The Greater Kanawha Valley Foundation · Tgkvf Inc · Truist West Virginia Foundation Inc · Herscher Foundation Inc · Enterprise Holdings Foundation · 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.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organisation KANAWHA VALLEY COLLECTIVE 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.
2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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.
05Through Plinth
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
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: CLARKSBURG MISSIONS INC.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
high risk
~2 months of operating runway; revenue held over 8 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
8 years of Form 990 filings, still active.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 237177860 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on CLARKSBURG MISSIONS INC, 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
- FlagFinancial stability— Roughly 2 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue held over the period.
- On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 38% of their budget — diversified.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
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.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
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
How do I get to Kanawha Valley Collective Inc?
Find your warmest path to Kanawha Valley Collective Inc 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.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines