· Public charity
South River Emc Community Assistance Corporation
To support organizations that are serving either the health, safety, or educational needs of citizens within the south river electric membership corporation service territory.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 65% of SOUTH RIVER EMC COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE CORPORATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 5 grants below total $44,960 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $266,683 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $221,723 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k2 grants · $15k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $30k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| TRANSITIONS LIFE CARE | $10,000 |
| SAMPSON CO PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN | $10,000 |
| DUNN POLICE ATHLETIC & ACTIVITIES | $10,000 |
| BROOKSIDE CHRISTIAN ACADEMY | $8,430 |
| SAMPSON COUNTY FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIA | $6,530 |
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, $30k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +23% since the first grant, against +18% for the ones you funded once.
16 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2025, 13 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 67% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k 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
- HOHOSPICE OF WAKE COUNTY INC4× · 2022–2025 · $40k · revenue +19%
- SRSOUTH RIVER ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP CORPORATION3× · 2019–2024 · $30k · revenue +23%
- WCWADE COMMUNITY FIRE DEPARTMENT4× · 2019–2023 · $30k · revenue +52%
Funded once
- APACTION PATHWAYS INCone grant, 2020 · $20k · revenue -7%
BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF CENTRAL CAROLINAgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue +146%- JCJOHNSTON-LEE-HARNETT COMMUNITY ACTION INCone grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue +18%
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.
Fire protection services
Fire protection for grimesland fire district
To provide fire protection services to individuals living in and visiting the cove city area.
Providing fire protection for district
Provide an all volunteer fire protection & emergency services for a section of yancey county, north carolina.
Provide fire protection services and fire prevention education for the community of cooleemee, nc.
Volunteer fire department and ems station
To provide fire services to the citizens of rolesville nc
The volunteer fire department serves the community in and around the town of parkton, nc.
To provide fire department services for the community of wise, nc and surrounding areas
Provide fire and rescue services in the lake lure and bills creek area of rutherford county nc
Provide fire protection to citizens and business in the rural area surrounding warrenton, north carolina.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Grays Creek Volunteer Fire Dept Inc and the most unlike its peers is Dunn Police Athl & Act League Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 28 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 28% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 5% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 19% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
21 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. 21 of the 29 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 HOSPICE OF WAKE COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds HUMAN CONNECTIONS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTH RIVER ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds WADE COMMUNITY FIRE DEPARTMENT ↗
- Who funds BEAVER DAM FIRE DEPARTMENT ↗
- Who funds EASTOVER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC ↗
- Who funds ACTION PATHWAYS INC ↗
- Who funds DUNN POLICE ATHL & ACT LEAGUE INC ↗
- Who funds SAMPSON COUNTY PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN ↗
- Who funds CLEMENT VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT ↗
- Who funds CENTRAL CAROLINA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds STEDMAN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT ↗
- Who funds GRAY'S CREEK VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT #24 ↗
- Who funds GRAYS CREEK VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT INC ↗
- Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF CENTRAL CAROLINA ↗
- Who funds JOHNSTON-LEE-HARNETT COMMUNITY ACTION INC ↗
- Who funds FIVE N TWO MINISTRIES ↗
- Who funds JANICE FAYES RANCH INC ↗
- Who funds BROOKSIDE CHRISTIAN ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds BETHANY RURAL FIRE DEPARTMENT INC ↗
- Who funds HARNETT COUNTY CHIEFS ASSOCIATION ↗
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: The Golden Leaf Inc · Duke Energy Foundation · Foundation for the Carolinas · Charities Aid Foundation America · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 organization South River Emc Community Assistance Corporation 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to South River Emc Community Assistance Corporation?
Find your warmest path to South River Emc Community Assistance Corporation 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.