Skip to content
The Greater Greenbrier Valley at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Community foundation

The Greater Greenbrier Valley

THE GREATER GREENBRIER VALLEY community foundation, inc.

$763k
Granted FY2022
21
Grants FY2022
3
States reached
$361k
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 2022.

Public Safety & Disaster$1.8MArts & Culture$1.7MPublic Benefit$1.2MPhilanthropy$954kEducation$784kReligion$717kCommunity Improvement$349kHuman Services$286kOther$0
02FY2022 · 21 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2022

  • Under $10k9 grants · $53k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $116k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $364k
  • $250k+1 grant · $361k
$10,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$23M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CITY OF WHITE SULPHER SPRINGS$360,867
DISABILITY OPPORTUNITY FUND$225,000
CARNEGIE HALL FOUNDATION INC$89,000
SENECA TRAIL CHARITABLE FOUNDATION$50,000
OLD STONE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH$24,850
NEW RIVER COMMUNITY AND TECHICAL CO$20,000
UNITED WAY OF THE GREENBRIER VALLEY$15,500
CAMP ALLEGHENY ALUMNI ASSOCIATION$15,500
GREENBRIER MILITARY SCHOOL ALUMNI$10,000
GREENBRIER COUNTY SCHOOLS$10,000
LUCKY PENNY$10,000
THE LEWISBURG FOUNDATION$10,000
HUMANE SOCIETY OF POCAHONTAS$7,900
ST THOMAS EPISCOPAL CHURCH$7,200
WVU INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY$6,000
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 (FY20–22, $264k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 6%. 15% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 6%DISABILITY OPPORTUNITY FUND: $225k → 6%UNITED WAY OF THE GREENBRIER VALLEY: $25k → 18%UNITED WAY OF THE GREENBRIER VALLEY: $14k → 18%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.

Which US states its grants reach

NY
OH
PA
NJ
KY
WV
VA
TN
FL
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.

59%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$5.6M · 21 repeat orgs$3.8M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +67% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

21 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2022, 12 since wound down; 11 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
73

Total granted

$5.6M
$3.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+67%
0%

Still filing today

38%
11%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 66% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $302k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22
Arts & CultureEducationHuman ServicesPhilanthropyFood & NutritionCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • ST
    SENECA TRAIL CHARITABLE FOUNDATION
    4× · 2018–2021 · $790k · revenue +34% · 48% of their budget
  • LF
    Lewisburg Foundation Incorporated
    7× · 2017–2024 · $497k · revenue +1%
  • NR
    NEW RIVER COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC
    5× · 2019–2024 · $185k · revenue +16%

Funded once

  • MD
    MENNONITE DISASTER SERVICE
    one grant, 2017 · $376k
  • CE
    CONSTRUCTION EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION OF NORTH CENTRAL WV INC
    one grant, 2017 · $276k · revenue +4% · 80% of their budget
  • HF
    HOMES FOR WHIITE SULPHURSJ NEATHAWK
    one grant, 2017 · $268k
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
The West Virginia Chamber Foundation
Public Benefit
2
Greenbrier Valley Restoration Project Inc

Gvrp, inc. is an entity focused on watershed protection and sustainable community development. gvrp is concentrating its initial efforts in two areas: public fundraising and development of a community center and charitable open space in…

Environment
3
Red River Economic Development

Economic Development and Tourism Promotion in Eastern Kentucky

Community Improvement
4
Heritage Farm Foundation
Philanthropy
5
West Virginia Association of Conservation Districts Inc

Promotes the conservation of natural resources

Environment
6
The Greater Greenbrier Valley
Philanthropy
7
Grayson County Bank Museum
—
8
Kanawha Salines Foundation Inc

The mission of the Kanawha Salines Foundation Inc. is to encourage and facilitate the preservation of the legacy of the Kanawha Valley salt industry. To further this mission the Foundation will collect photographs, relics, documents,…

Arts & Culture
9
Greenbrier County Schools Foundation Inc

Scholarships

Education
10
The Grace Foundation for the Appalachian
Arts & Culture
11
West Virginia First Foundation Inc
Health
12
Greater Erie Economic Development Corporation
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is United Way of the Greenbrier Valley Inc; the most unlike its peers is Lucky Penny. 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

26 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. 26 of the 105 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.

5
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
22/26
Grantees still filing
16/26
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CITY OF WHITE SULPHUR SPRINGS: $1,023,562 · OtherCITY OF WHITE SULPHUR SPRINGSEMMANUEL UNITED METHODIST CHURCH: $535,900 · OtherEMMANUEL UNITED METHODIST CHURCHLewisburg Foundation Incorporated: $497,100 · OtherLewisburg Foundation IncorporatedMENNONITE DISASTER SERVICE: $375,700 · OtherMENNONITE DISASTER SERVICECONSTRUCTION EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION OF NORTH CENTRAL WV INC: $275,822 · OtherHOMES FOR WHIITE SULPHURSJ NEATHAWK: $267,803 · OtherALL OTHERS UNDER 5001: $263,812 · OtherHOMES FOR WHITE SULPHUR SPRINGS: $250,000 · OtherLYNCH CONSTRUCTION: $229,437 · Other+82 more: $2,828,872 · Other+82 moreCARNEGIE HALL FOUNDATION INC: $1,599,800 · Arts & CultureCARNEGIE HALL FOUND…+4 more: $50,100 · Arts & CultureSENECA TRAIL CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $790,000 · PhilanthropySENECA TR…THE DISABILITY FUND INC: $225,000 · Human ServicesUNITED WAY OF THE GREENBRIER VALLEY INC: $54,529 · Human ServicesSTATE FAIR OF WEST VIRGINIA: $50,700 · Food & NutritionAlderson Main Street Inc: $40,000 · EnvironmentGREENBRIER MILITARY SCHOOL ALUMNI A: $10,000 · EducationWEST VIRGINIA WESLEYAN COLLEGE: $5,250 · EducationSpartan Athletic Foundation: $5,100 · EducationDAVIS & ELKINS COLLEGE: $5,000 · Education
Other$6,548,008Arts & Culture$1,649,900Philanthropy$790,000Human Services$279,529Food & Nutrition$50,700Environment$40,000Education$25,350

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCARNEGIE HALL FOUNDATION INC: $1,599,800 over 4y, 21% of budgetSENECA TRAIL CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $790,000 over 4y, 48% of budgetLewisburg Foundation Incorporated: $497,100 over 7y, 19% of budgetCONSTRUCTION EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION OF NORTH CENTRAL WV INC: $275,822 over 1y, 80% of budgetTHE DISABILITY FUND INC: $225,000 over 2y, 4.5% of budgetNEW RIVER COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC: $184,830 over 5y, 23% of budgetCARNEGIE HALL INC: $75,559 over 3y, 6.0% of budgetUNITED WAY OF THE GREENBRIER VALLEY INC: $54,529 over 4y, 4.6% of budgetSTATE FAIR OF WEST VIRGINIA: $50,700 over 3y, 2.6% of budgetAlderson Main Street Inc: $40,000 over 1y, 68% of budgetGREENBRIER VALLEY AQUATIC CENTER: $21,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetBimbo Coles & Company Project Co: $19,842 over 1y, 23% of budgetGREENBRIER REPERTORY THEATRE COMPANY: $19,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetGLENVILLE STATE COLLEGE RESEARCH CORPORATION: $15,500 over 4y, 10% of budgetCAMP ALLEGHANY ALUMNI ASSOCIATION INC: $15,500 over 2y, 98% of budgetGREENBRIER MILITARY SCHOOL ALUMNI A: $10,000 over 2y, 27% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF POCAHONTAS COUNTY: $7,900 over 2y, 14% of budgetPOCAHONTAS COUNTY FAMILY RESOURCE NETWORK: $6,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetMONROE COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY: $5,600 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetWEST VIRGINIA WESLEYAN COLLEGE: $5,250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDAVIS & ELKINS COLLEGE: $5,000 over 2y, 0.0% 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 CARNEGIE HALL FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds SENECA TRAIL CHARITABLE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Lewisburg Foundation Incorporated ↗
  • Who funds CONSTRUCTION EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION OF NORTH CENTRAL WV INC ↗
  • Who funds THE DISABILITY FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds NEW RIVER COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds CARNEGIE HALL INC ↗
  • Who funds UNITED WAY OF THE GREENBRIER VALLEY INC ↗
  • Who funds STATE FAIR OF WEST VIRGINIA ↗
  • Who funds Alderson Main Street 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.

The Greater Kanawha V…Mary B Nickell Founda…The Jeanne G Hamilton…Hollowell Dawkins Fou…The Daywood Foundatio…United Way of the Gre…Tgkvf IncAbner & Mildred Levin…Peoples Bank Foundati…The West Virginia Hum…West Virginia Univers…National Collegiate A…
The Greater Kanawha Valley FoundationWV35.5× affinity15 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Greater Kanawha Valley Foundation · Mary B Nickell Foundation Inc · The Jeanne G Hamilton and Lawson W Hamilton Jr Family Foundation Inc · Hollowell Dawkins Foundation Inc · The Daywood Foundationinc · United Way of the Greenbrier Valley Inc · Tgkvf Inc · Abner & Mildred Levine Family Foundation Inc · Peoples Bank Foundation · The West Virginia Humanities Council Inc · West Virginia University Research Corporation · National Collegiate Athletic Association

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 The Greater Greenbrier Valley funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Greater Greenbrier Valley. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's 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, 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 The Greater Greenbrier Valley?

    Find your warmest path to The Greater Greenbrier Valley 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 105 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports $1.0M 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 FY2022, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Greater Greenbrier Valley’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