Skip to content
Rowan Arts Council Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Rowan Arts Council Inc

To raise funds for cultural arts for arts & cultural organizations within rowan county.

$162k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$28k
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, FY2021 to 2025.

Arts & Culture$606kYouth Development$8kPublic Benefit$8kEnvironment$7kPublic Safety & Disaster$5k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 7 grants below total $106,252, the rows itemized in this filing. The $161,851 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $55,599 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.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $24k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $82k
$18,188
Median grant
1
States reached
$4k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PIEDMONT PLAYERS$27,688
SALISBURY ROWAN SYMPHONY$18,188
WATERWORKS VISUAL ARTS CENTER$18,188
LEE STREET THEATRE$18,188
ART & SOUL ROWAN$9,500
CITY OF SALISBURY$7,500
HAPPY ROOTS$7,000
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 (FY21–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 16%. 0% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 16%WATERWORKS VISUAL ARTS CENTER: $50k → 15%LEE STREET THEATRE: $50k → 15%WATERWORKS VISUAL ARTS CENTER: $25k → 15%WATERWORKS VISUAL ARTS CENTER: $25k → 15%LEE STREET THEATRE: $25k → 15%LEE STREET THEATRE: $22k → 15%WATERWORKS VISUAL ARTS CENTER: $18k → 15%LEE STREET THEATRE: $18k → 15%WATERWORKS VISUAL ARTS CENTER: $18k → 15%LEE STREET THEATRE: $18k → 15%ART & SOUL ROWAN: $10k → 15%HISTORIC SALISBURY FOUNDATION: $9k → 15%SABRINA BOUGIE STYLES VIBES: $8k → 15%CITY OF SALISBURY: $8k → 15%DESTINY STONE-MUSIC HOUSE: $8k → 15%HAPPY ROOTS: $7k → 15%TOWN OF EAST SPENCER: $8k → 15%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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$593k · 6 repeat orgs$40k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +60% since the first grant, against -25% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
4

Total granted

$593k
$33k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+60%
-25%

Still filing today

67%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24’25
Arts & CultureEnvironmentOther
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

  • PP
    PIEDMONT PLAYERS THEATRE INC
    5× · 2021–2025 · $145k · revenue +66%
  • SS
    SALISBURY SYMPHONY INC
    5× · 2021–2025 · $140k · revenue +60%
  • WV
    WATERWORKS VISUAL ARTS CENTER INC
    5× · 2021–2025 · $137k · revenue +36%

Funded once

  • HS
    HISTORIC SALISBURY FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2021 · $9k · revenue -25%
  • TO
    TOWN OF EAST SPENCER
    one grant, 2021 · $8k
  • DS
    DESTINY STONE-MUSIC HOUSE
    one grant, 2021 · $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
04the grantee network

6 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. 6 of the 11 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/6
Grantees still filing
4/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PIEDMONT PLAYERS THEATRE INC: $145,341 · Arts & CulturePIEDMONT PLAYERS THEATRE INCSALISBURY SYMPHONY INC: $139,753 · Arts & CultureSALISBURY SYMPHONY INCWATERWORKS VISUAL ARTS CENTER INC: $136,940 · Arts & CultureWATERWORKS VISUAL ARTS CENTER INCLEE STREET THEATRE: $134,128 · Arts & CultureLEE STREET THEATRE+1 more: $8,900 · Arts & CultureCITY OF SALISBURY: $21,463 · OtherCITY OF SA…ART & SOUL ROWAN INC: $15,500 · OtherART & SOUL…TOWN OF EAST SPENCER: $8,250 · OtherTOWN OF EA…DESTINY STONE-MUSIC HOUSE: $8,000 · OtherDESTINY ST…SABRINA BOUGIE STYLES VIBES: $8,000 · OtherSABRINA BO…HAPPY ROOTS INC: $7,000 · Environment
Arts & Culture$565,062Other$61,213Environment$7,000

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

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPIEDMONT PLAYERS THEATRE INC: $145,341 over 5y, 15% of budgetSALISBURY SYMPHONY INC: $139,753 over 5y, 14% of budgetWATERWORKS VISUAL ARTS CENTER INC: $136,940 over 5y, 12% of budgetLEE STREET THEATRE: $134,128 over 5y, 9.7% of budgetHISTORIC SALISBURY FOUNDATION INC: $8,900 over 1y, 2.0% 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.

  • Who funds PIEDMONT PLAYERS THEATRE INC ↗
  • Who funds SALISBURY SYMPHONY INC ↗
  • Who funds WATERWORKS VISUAL ARTS CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds LEE STREET THEATRE ↗
  • Who funds HISTORIC SALISBURY FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds HAPPY ROOTS INC ↗

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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Foundation for the Ca…Margaret C Woodson Fo…The Hurley-Trammell F…The Wallace Family Fo…The Goodman Foundatio…Amazonsmile Foundation
Foundation for the CarolinasNC18.8× affinity7 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Foundation for the Carolinas · Margaret C Woodson Foundation Inc · The Hurley-Trammell Foundation · The Wallace Family Foundation Inc · The Goodman Foundation Inc · 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 Rowan Arts Council Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Rowan Arts Council Inc. 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
    4report 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 Rowan Arts Council Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Rowan Arts Council Inc 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 11 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 Rowan Arts Council’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