Skip to content
Pee Dee Electric Membership Corp at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Pee Dee Electric Membership Corp

Safe and effective distribution of electricity to the members of pdemc

$103k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$8k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Public Safety & Disaster$328kHealth$15kPublic Benefit$15kRecreation & Sports$15kAnimals$8kYouth Development$8kArts & Culture$8kHuman Services$7kOther$0
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 6 grants below total $43,209, the rows itemized in this filing. The $102,554 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $59,345 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$7,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$180M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CANDOR VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT$7,500
Individual grant recipient$7,500
GULLEDGE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT$7,500
LAUREL HILL FIRE DEPARTMENT$7,500
Individual grant recipient$7,500
Individual grant recipient$5,709
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 92% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%LANES CREEK VFD: $8k → 7%WEST END FIRE & RESCUE: $8k → 10%AQUADALE FIRE DEPARTMENT: $8k → 13%PEKIN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $8k → 16%Anson Rescue Squad: $8k → 22%MOUNTAIN CREEK FIRE DEPARTMENT: $8k → 23%LAUREL HILL FIRE DEPARTMENT: $8k → 24%RICHMOND COUNTY RESCUE SQUAD: $8k → 5%BEAVER LANE VOL RESCUE & FD: $8k → 7%West End Fire and Rescue: $8k → 10%Aquadale Fire Dept: $8k → 13%GULLEDGE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $8k → 22%ELLERBE FIRE DEPARTMENT: $8k → 23%LAUREL HILL FIRE DEPT: $8k → 24%SEVEN LAKS FIRE RESCUE & EMS: $8k → 10%CANDOR VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $8k → 16%WADESBORO FIRE DEPARTMENT: $8k → 22%ELLERBE RESCUE SQUAD: $8k → 23%LAUREL HILL FD: $8k → 24%ALLEN CROSSROADS FIRE DEPARTMENT: $8k → 7%WEST END FIRE & RESCUE: $8k → 10%CANDOR VOL FD: $8k → 16%WADESBORO FIRE DEPARTMENT: $8k → 22%DERBY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT: $8k → 23%GIBSON SOUTHWEST DISTRICT FIRE DPT: $8k → 24%CANDOR VFD: $8k → 16%WADESBORO FIRE DEPT: $8k → 22%ELLERBE FIRE DEPARTMENT: $8k → 23%ELLERBE FIRE DEPARTMENT: $8k → 23%MOUNTAIN CREEK FIRE DEPARTMENT: $8k → 23%LILESVILLE FIRE DEPARTMENT: $8k → 22%ELLERBE RESCUE SQUAD INC: $8k → 23%LILESVILLE FD: $8k → 22%HOFFMAN FD: $8k → 23%HOFFMAN FIRE DEPT AND RESCUE SQUAD: $8k → 23%PEACHLAND FIRE DISTRICT: $8k → 22%HOFFMAN FIRE & RESCUE: $8k → 23%HOFFMAN FD: $8k → 23%CITY OF HAMLET FD: $8k → 23%HAMLET RESCUE & EMS: $8k → 23%Hamlet Rescue EMS: $8k → 23%HAMLET RESCUE AND EMS: $8k → 23%HAMLET RESCUE & EMS: $8k → 23%CITY OF HAMLET FD: $8k → 23%City of Hamlet Fire Dept: $8k → 23%CORDOVA FIRE AND RESCUE: $8k → 23%CITY OF HAMLET FIRE DEPARTMENT: $8k → 23%RICHMOND COUNTY CHEIFS ASSOCIATION: $8k → 23%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.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$377k · 19 repeat orgs$98k to everyone else

19 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 16 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
10

Total granted

$377k
$75k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+49%
+71%

Still filing today

47%
60%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 48% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $23k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’24’25
Public Safety & DisasterHealthOther
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

  • ER
    EAST ROCKINGHAM FIRE DEPARTMENT INC
    5× · 2017–2024 · $38k · revenue +127%
  • LH
    LAUREL HILL FIRE DEPARTMENT INC
    4× · 2017–2025 · $30k · revenue +49%
  • HF
    HOFFMAN FIRE DEPARTMENT & RESCUE SQUAD INC
    4× · 2018–2024 · $30k · revenue +16%

Funded once

  • AC
    ALLEN'S CROSSROADS VFDgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $8k · revenue +71%
  • NS
    New Salem Volunteer Fire Dept Incgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $8k · revenue +181%
  • PF
    PEACHLAND FIRE DISTRICT
    one grant, 2022 · $8k
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
Littleton Volunteer Fire Department Inc

Provide fire and rescue services to the citizens of our fire district

Public Safety & Disaster
2
North Metcalfe Volunteer FIre Department

Services to the Public with Fire Protection and Rescue

Public Safety & Disaster
3
Greenwood Volunteer Fire Department

Fire and rescue services

Public Safety & Disaster
4
Burkettsville Community Fire Depart

Fire and emergency response to granville twp.

Philanthropy
5
Floyd Community Volunteer Firedepartment Incorporated

Non Profit Volunteer Fire Department

Public Safety & Disaster
6
Town of Unionville Volunteer Fire

Fire protection for the residents of unionville nc

Public Safety & Disaster
7
Rudolph Volunteer Fire Department Inc

Provide fire fighting services

—
8
Valley View Volunteer Fire Department

Volunteer Fire Department that responds to service calls to extinguish fires or help with medical emergencies in the area.

Public Safety & Disaster
9
Draneville Voluntary Fire Department Inc

Fire fighting and rescue

Public Safety & Disaster
10
Bell Township Vfd

First response fire protection

—
11
Cross Creek Volunteer Fire Dept Inc

Provide fire protection, medical response, and brush fire to the communities of island grove and cross creek of florida

Human Services
12
Knifley Area Volunteer Fire Department
Public Safety & Disaster
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northside Volunteer Fire Dept Inc; the most unlike its peers is Gulledge Volunteer Fire Department. 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

17 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 17 of the 32 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
9
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/17
Grantees still filing
13/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

EAST ROCKINGHAM FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $37,500 · OtherEAST ROCKINGHAM FIRE DEPARTMENT INCLAUREL HILL FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $30,000 · OtherLAUREL HILL FIRE DEPARTMENT INCRICHMOND COUNTY RESCUE SQUAD: $30,000 · OtherRICHMOND COUNTY RESCUE SQUADLILESVILLE FD: $29,112 · OtherLILESVILLE FDCITY OF HAMLET FIRE DEPARTMENT: $22,500 · OtherCITY OF HAMLET FIRE DEPARTMENTIndividual grant recipient: $15,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $15,000 · OtherTOWN OF WADESBORO: $15,000 · OtherCANDOR VOL FD: $15,000 · OtherELLERBE RESCUE SQUAD: $15,000 · OtherBEAVER LANE VOLUNTEER RESCUE & FIRE DEPARTMENT: $14,550 · OtherPEKIN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $14,400 · OtherELLERBE FIRE DEPARTMENT: $13,700 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $12,322 · Other+8 more: $60,000 · Other+8 moreMOUNTAIN CREEK FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $15,000 · Public Safety & DisasterMOUNTAIN CREEK FIRE…NORTHSIDE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT INC: $15,000 · Public Safety & DisasterNORTHSIDE VOLUNTEER…WEST END FIRE & RESCUE INC: $15,000 · Public Safety & DisasterWEST END FIRE & RES…ALLEN'S CROSSROADS VFD: $7,500 · Public Safety & DisasterALLEN'S CROSSROADS …New Salem Volunteer Fire Dept Inc: $7,500 · Public Safety & DisasterNew Salem Volunteer…GIBSON SOUTHWEST DISTRICT FIRE DEPARTMENT: $7,500 · Public Safety & DisasterGIBSON SOUTHWEST DI…AQUADALE RURAL VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $7,500 · Public Safety & DisasterAQUADALE RURAL VOLU…LANES CREEK VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $7,500 · Public Safety & DisasterLANES CREEK VOLUNTE…HOFFMAN FIRE DEPARTMENT & RESCUE SQUAD INC: $30,000 · HealthHOFFMAN FIRE…HAMLET RESCUE & EMERGENCY MEDICAL: $22,500 · HealthHAMLET RESCU…
Other$339,084Public Safety & Disaster$82,500Health$52,500

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetEAST ROCKINGHAM FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $37,500 over 5y, 4.0% of budgetLAUREL HILL FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $30,000 over 4y, 9.7% of budgetHOFFMAN FIRE DEPARTMENT & RESCUE SQUAD INC: $30,000 over 4y, 5.9% of budgetRICHMOND COUNTY RESCUE SQUAD: $30,000 over 4y, 18% of budgetHAMLET RESCUE & EMERGENCY MEDICAL: $22,500 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetMOUNTAIN CREEK FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $15,000 over 2y, 8.8% of budgetNORTHSIDE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT INC: $15,000 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetWEST END FIRE & RESCUE INC: $15,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetELLERBE RESCUE SQUAD: $15,000 over 2y, 14% of budgetBEAVER LANE VOLUNTEER RESCUE & FIRE DEPARTMENT: $14,550 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetALLEN'S CROSSROADS VFD: $7,500 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetGULLEDGE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $7,500 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetCORDOVA FIRE AND RESCUE INC: $7,500 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetGIBSON SOUTHWEST DISTRICT FIRE DEPARTMENT: $7,500 over 1y, 6.9% of budgetLANES CREEK VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $7,500 over 1y, 2.7% 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.

Duke Energy Foundation
Duke Energy FoundationNC11.5× affinity5 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Duke Energy 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 Pee Dee Electric Membership Corp funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Pee Dee Electric Membership Corp. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 Pee Dee Electric Membership Corp?

    Find your warmest path to Pee Dee Electric Membership Corp 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 32 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Pee Dee Electric Membership’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