Skip to content
South Richmond Rotary Club Service Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

South Richmond Rotary Club Service Foundation

Fundraising for scholarships and charitable contributions

$147k
Granted FY2023
2
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$35k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0191% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2023.

Recreation & Sports$143kHuman Services$114kHealth$92kInternational$48kArts & Culture$36kEducation$19kHousing & Shelter$11kOther$0
02FY2023 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $70,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $146,700 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $76,700 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.
$35,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$542k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CONEXUS$35,000
VETERANS & ATHLETES UNITED$35,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY17–23, $216k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 13% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%OPERATION HEALING FORCES: $27k → 12%YMCA BRIGHT BEGINNINGS: $6k → 9%FAMILIES OF THE WOUNDED FUND: $25k → 7%FAMILIES OF THE WOUNDED FUND: $15k → 7%VETERANS & ATHLETES UNITED: $50k → 7%VETERANS & ATHLETES UNITED: $35k → 7%VETERANS & ATHLETES UNITED: $25k → 7%VETERANS & ATHLETES UNITED: $20k → 7%VETERANS & ATHLETES UNITED: $13k → 7%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.

80%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$367k · 7 repeat orgs$91k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +93% since the first grant, against +32% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2023, 5 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
10

Total granted

$367k
$91k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+93%
+32%

Still filing today

86%
60%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
Human ServicesInternationalHealthEducationPublic BenefitArts & CultureOther
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

  • VA
    VETERANS AND ATHLETES UNITED INC
    6× · 2018–2023 · $143k · revenue +93% · 44% of their budget
  • C
    Conexus
    5× · 2019–2023 · $92k · revenue +487%
  • CI
    COMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS OF CHESTERFIELD
    2× · 2019–2022 · $19k · revenue +227%

Funded once

  • OH
    OPERATION HEALING FORCES INCgraduated
    2× · 2020–2021 · $27k · revenue +132%
  • FO
    Friends of Barnabas Foundation Inc
    one grant, 2017 · $25k · revenue +8%
  • WP
    WORLD PEDIATRICS
    2× · 2020–2021 · $9k · revenue +7%
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
Vcu Health Tappahannock Hospital

To deliver important healthcare services with exceptional quality and patient-centered care.

Health
2
Community Memorial Hospital

To provide excellence in the delivery of healthcare.

Health
3
Bon Secours - Richmond Health System Inc

The mission is to bring compassion to health care and to be good to those in need, especially those who are poor and dying. as a system of caregivers, we commit ourselves to help bring people and communities to health and wholeness.

Health
4
Veterans of Foreign Wars Foundation

The vfw foundation's mission is to serve and enhance the lives of military veterans, service members, and their families by securing resources to promote positive outcomes.

Employment
5
Worldwide Vets Incorporated

Our goal is to sustainably improve animal welfare, provide veterinary care, and improve veterinary education globally. in order to achieve this goal, we work in over 10 countries, across 5 continents, supporting local people and animals,…

Animals
6
Rappahannock General Hospital Foundation Inc

The rappahannock general hospital foundation is a not for profit corporation established for the benefit and support of rappahannock general hospital. its purpose is to assist the hospital in accomplishing its mission through the…

—
7
Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States Dept of Nc

To foster camaraderie among united states veterans of overseas conflicts. to serve our veterans, the military and our communities. to advocate on behalf of all veterans.

—
8
Veterans Healing Farm

Veterans Healing Farm enhances the mental, emotional, and physical well-being of our nations Veterans and their families.

Public Benefit
9
Baptist Health Foundation Richmond Inc

The mission of Baptist Health Foundation Richmond is to serve as an instrument to assist, advance and strengthen Baptist Health Richmond hospital in its mission and ministry of healing, in its service as a health center for the community,…

Human Services
10
Richmond Fisher House Foundation

None

Human Services
11
Mcv Associated Physicians

The mission of the organization is to provide physicians and other healthcare professionals to support the needs of the community, as well as the academic mission of the vcu school of medicine.

Health
12
Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States Dept of Nc

To preserve and strengthen comradeship among members, assist worthy comrades, widows and orphans of comrades; perpetuate the memory and history of our deceased veterans; promote true allegiance to the Government of the US. Conduct programs…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Young Men's Christian Association of Greater Richmond (6769); the most unlike its peers is Hh Mackenzie Chapter 3. 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

13 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. 13 of the 18 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
10/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

VETERANS AND ATHLETES UNITED INC: $143,000 · Human ServicesVETERANS AND ATHLETES UNITED INCFAMILIES OF THE WOUNDED FUND INC: $40,000 · Human ServicesFAMILIES OF THE WOUNDED FUND INCOPERATION HEALING FORCES INC: $27,000 · Human ServicesOPERATION HEALING FORCES INC+1 more: $5,900 · Human ServicesConexus: $92,000 · HealthConexusTHE VIRGINIA WAR MUSEUM FOUNDATION INC: $20,000 · OtherTHE VIRGINIA…REBUILDING TOGETHER OF RICHMOND: $11,000 · OtherREBUILDING T…Individual grant recipient: $6,000 · OtherIndividual g…THE HENRICUS FOUNDATION: $5,500 · OtherTHE HENRICUS…MIGHTY PEN PROJECT: $5,000 · OtherMIGHTY PEN P…+2 more: $2,500 · OtherFriends of Barnabas Foundation Inc: $25,000 · InternationalFriends of …THE ROTARY FOUNDATION OF ROTARY INTERNATIONAL: $13,400 · InternationalTHE ROTARY …WORLD PEDIATRICS: $9,217 · InternationalWORLD PEDIA…HH MACKENZIE CHAPTER 3: $41,500 · Public BenefitHH MACKEN…COMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS OF CHESTERFIELD: $19,000 · EducationChesterfield Cultural Arts Foundation: $5,000 · Arts & Culture
Human Services$215,900Health$92,000Other$50,000International$47,617Public Benefit$41,500Education$19,000Arts & Culture$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetVETERANS AND ATHLETES UNITED INC: $143,000 over 6y, 44% of budgetConexus: $92,000 over 5y, 1.5% of budgetHH MACKENZIE CHAPTER 3: $41,500 over 6y, 52% of budgetFAMILIES OF THE WOUNDED FUND INC: $40,000 over 2y, 8.9% of budgetOPERATION HEALING FORCES INC: $27,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetFriends of Barnabas Foundation Inc: $25,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetCOMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS OF CHESTERFIELD: $19,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetTHE ROTARY FOUNDATION OF ROTARY INTERNATIONAL: $13,400 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetREBUILDING TOGETHER OF RICHMOND: $11,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetWORLD PEDIATRICS: $9,217 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetYoung Men's Christian Association of Greater Richmond (6769): $5,900 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetChesterfield Cultural Arts Foundation: $5,000 over 1y, 25% 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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

The Community Foundat…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Community Foundation IncVA15.3× affinity5 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Community Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 South Richmond Rotary Club Service Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from South Richmond Rotary Club Service Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%4%15%34%60%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
    1get no government money at all
    6report 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.

    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 18 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $163k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2023, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on South Richmond Rotary Club Service’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