Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Southeast Rural Community Assistance Project Inc

Southeast rural community assistance project, inc.

$388k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$140k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20212024.

Community Improvement$1.3MEnvironment$314kHousing & Shelter$183kHuman Services$142kHealth$41kReligion$41k
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 7 grants below total $323,655 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $387,969 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $64,314 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 · FY2024

  • $10k–50k4 grants · $83k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $240k
$40,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$11M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TOWN OF VICTORIA$140,319
PEOPLE INC$50,000
SUSSEX SERVICE AUTHORITY$50,000
TOWN OF NARROWS INC$40,000
EASTERN SHORE OF VIRGINIA$17,800
TOWN OF PAMPLIN$13,860
MID-ATLANTIC EPISCOPAL DISTRICT AME ZION CHURCH$11,676
02The need
03

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 (FY21–21, $21k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%BAY AGING: $21k → 12%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 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.

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.

23%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$444k · 7 repeat orgs$1.5M to everyone else

7 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
31

Total granted

$444k
$1.4M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+31%
+77%

Still filing today

29%
13%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 47% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $172k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24
Housing & ShelterCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesOther

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

  • TO
    TOWN OF VICTORIA
    2× · 2022–2024 · $160k
  • CO
    CITY OF GALAX
    2× · 2022–2023 · $100k
  • TB
    THOMAS BRIDGE WATER CORPORATION
    2× · 2021–2022 · $45k · revenue +10%

Funded once

  • TO
    TOWN OF SOUTH BOSTON
    one grant, 2023 · $200k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $121k
  • CB
    CHESAPEAKE BAY HOUSING INC
    one grant, 2022 · $104k · revenue -94%

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
Habitat for Humanity Middlesex Inc

Build affordable housing for low wage earner families of middlesex county, virginia.

Housing & Shelter
2
Habitat for Humanity Virginia

Habitat for Humanity Virginia provides support to Virginia affiliates so that they can build or facilitate affordable housing by offering advocacy, organizational development, funding, and resource development

Housing & Shelter
3
Central Virginia Housing Coalition

Central virginia housing coalition improves the regional quality of life by providing affordable housing opportunities to low income families through coalition, education, counseling, and financial assistance.

4
Eastern Shore of Virginia Habitat for Humanity Inc

To provide modest, decent homes for low income families.

Housing & Shelter
5
Lowell Area Housing Inc Dba Schneider Manor
6
Virginia Beach Community Development Corporation

To assist the city of Virginia Beach by partnering with the public and private sectors to provide quality affordable housing opportunities to low and moderate income people.

Community Improvement
7
Partnership for Housing Affordability

In response to housing needs in our communities, we champion policies, developments, and programs for quality affordable housing in the Richmond region.

Education
8
Rappahannock Elder Housing Corporation

Rappahannock elder housing corporation owns and operates leaflin lane apartments. these subsidized one-bedroom units in culpeper, va are available for rent to persons age 62 and older who meet the low income criteria established by hud.

Housing & Shelter
9
West Virginia Homes Inc

Provide housing to low-income families.

10
Habitat for Humanity of Gloucester-Mathews Inc

This organization is an affiliate of Habitat for Humanity International Inc. Their mission is to eliminate substandard housing within the counties of Gloucester and Mathews Virginia.

11
Housing Resources Bainbridge

Housing Resources Bainbridge is a community land trust, conserving land for permanently affordable housing. By making it possible for people of diverse backgrounds and incomes to live on Bainbridge, we are building a more equitable,…

Housing & Shelter
12
Virginia Community Development Corp

VCDC delivers vital financial resources and support while collaborating with local organizations dedicated to social impact, ensuring the creation of affordable homes in vibrant neighborhoods where everyone can thrive.

Housing & Shelter

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Fluvannalouisa Housing Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Davis Center Community Foundation. 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

8 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 43 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
7/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

TOWN OF SOUTH BOSTON — $200,000 · OtherTOWN OF SOUTH BOSTONTOWN OF VICTORIA — $160,319 · OtherTOWN OF VICTORIAIndividual grant recipient — $120,908 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCITY OF GALAX — $100,000 · OtherCITY OF GALAXTOWN OF BLACKSTONE — $90,000 · OtherTOWN OF WHITE STONE — $78,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient — $68,000 · OtherNELSON COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORI — $61,043 · Other+31 more — $916,816 · Other+31 moreCHESAPEAKE BAY HOUSING INC — $104,460 · Housing & ShelterEASTERN SHORE OF VIRGINIA HOUSING ALLIANCE — $17,800 · Housing & ShelterDAVIS CENTER COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $35,550 · Community ImprovementBAY AGING — $20,910 · Human Services
Other$1,795,586Housing & Shelter$122,260Community Improvement$35,550Human Services$20,910

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetPEOPLE INCORPORATED OF VIRGINIA — $50,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHOMAS BRIDGE WATER CORPORATION — $45,336 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetROCKBRIDGE AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC — $35,720 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetDAVIS CENTER COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $35,550 over 1y, 56% of budgetFLUVANNALOUISA HOUSING FOUNDATION — $25,250 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetBAY AGING — $20,910 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEASTERN SHORE OF VIRGINIA HOUSING ALLIANCE — $17,800 over 1y, 3.0% of budget
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 CHESAPEAKE BAY HOUSING INC
  • Who funds PEOPLE INCORPORATED OF VIRGINIA
  • Who funds THOMAS BRIDGE WATER CORPORATION
  • Who funds ROCKBRIDGE AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC
  • Who funds DAVIS CENTER COMMUNITY FOUNDATION
  • Who funds FLUVANNALOUISA HOUSING FOUNDATION
  • Who funds BAY AGING
  • Who funds EASTERN SHORE OF VIRGINIA HOUSING ALLIANCE

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.

Amazonsmile FoundationWA0.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Southeast Rural Community Assistance Project 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.

2025
202122232425
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 43 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph