Skip to content

· Private foundation

The H Clay and Wavie M Presnell Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$148k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What it funds
0185% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Religion$209kRecreation & Sports$81kFood & Nutrition$68kHuman Services$64kEducation$48kHealth$46kYouth Development$45kHousing & Shelter$44kOther$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $48k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $100k
$30,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SWANNANSA VALLEY CHRISTIAN MINISTRY$100,000
CHESTNUT HILL BAPTIST CHURCH$30,000
WINSTON SALEM STEALERS GIRLS BASKETBALL$18,000
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 (FY24–24, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 14%100 MAN PROJECT: $10k → 14%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.

46%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$352k · 11 repeat orgs$419k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +29% since the first grant, against +22% for those funded once.

11 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
19

Total granted

$352k
$271k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+29%
+22%

Still filing today

36%
32%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $148k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesInternationalYouth DevelopmentFood & NutritionHealthHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    4× · 2021–2024 · $47k
  • RC
    Randolph County Family Crisis Center Inc
    2× · 2022–2024 · $46k · revenue +29%
  • BA
    BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF HP (ASHEBORO)
    4× · 2020–2023 · $45k

Funded once

  • PC
    POWERPOINT CHURCH
    one grant, 2023 · $45k
  • SE
    SEAGROVE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PTO
    one grant, 2020 · $29k
  • RC
    RANDOLPH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
    one grant, 2020 · $24k
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
Hope Center of Rutherford County Inc

Provide assistance

Housing & Shelter
2
Wilderness Refuge Recovery Ministries

Transitional home

Health
3
Hope Recuperative Care

Provide care for homeless persons recently released from the hospital

—
4
Redirection-Nc

Redirection-NC provides transitional housing and support services to women who are justice involved which presents a barrier affecting their ability to obtain housing as they rejoin the community. We assist in connecting them with…

Housing & Shelter
5
Recovery Point Ministry

Womens recovery center in arkansas

Human Services
6
Refuge of Blount County

Faith based drug and alcohol rehabilitation.

Religion
7
Hope House of Cherokee County Inc

Provide temporary shelter and assistance

—
8
Way of Hope of Murfreesboro Inc

To provide shelter and needs to homeless

—
9
Basics Christian Ministries Inc

Basics mission is to serve the neediest people in Rutherford County NC. We provide food clothing hygiene products and other necessities to anyone in need at no cost to them as well as counseling access to health services and other social…

Religion
10
Ryan's Hope Only Jesus

We help transition the addicted and incarcerated. we help men after incarceration and addiction programs to find employment, resources, etc. we house men from 6 months to 1 year generally if they are compliant with our rules.

Crime & Legal
11
Ruths House of Hope

Transitional housing

—
12
Break N Ground Ministries Inc

Rehabilitating men

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Tabitha Ministry; the most unlike its peers is Emily's Kids Foundation Inc. 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

10 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. 10 of the 33 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SWANNANOA VALLEY CHRISTIAN MINISTRY: $100,000 · OtherSWANNANOA VALLEY CHRISTIAN MINISTRYIndividual grant recipient: $47,200 · OtherIndividual grant recipientBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF HP (ASHEBORO): $45,000 · OtherBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF HP (ASHEBORO)POWERPOINT CHURCH: $45,000 · OtherPOWERPOINT CHURCHASHEBORO SHELTER OF HOPE: $43,800 · OtherASHEBORO SHELTER OF HOPECHESTNUT HILL BAPTIST CHURCH: $30,000 · OtherSEAGROVE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PTO: $29,300 · OtherEMILY'S KIDS FOUNDATION INC: $26,000 · OtherRANDOLPH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE: $24,285 · OtherMIDWAY WESLEYAN CHURCH: $24,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $24,000 · Other+14 more: $176,036 · Other+14 moreRandolph County Family Crisis Center Inc: $45,766 · Human Services100 MAN PROJECT INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesVICTORY JUNCTION GANG CAMP INC: $45,000 · Youth DevelopmentOUR DAILY BREAD KITCHEN INC: $15,000 · Food & NutritionWORLD RELIEF CORP OF NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF EVANGELICALS: $13,000 · InternationalKEATONS PLACE: $10,000 · HealthTABITHA MINISTRY: $10,000 · Housing & ShelterSPIRIT HORSE RANCH RESCUE AND EDUCATION INC: $8,000 · Animals
Other$614,621Human Services$55,766Youth Development$45,000Food & Nutrition$15,000International$13,000Health$10,000Housing & Shelter$10,000Animals$8,000

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 budgetRandolph County Family Crisis Center Inc: $45,766 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetVICTORY JUNCTION GANG CAMP INC: $45,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetASHEBORO SHELTER OF HOPE: $43,800 over 4y, 15% of budgetEMILY'S KIDS FOUNDATION INC: $26,000 over 3y, 29% of budgetOUR DAILY BREAD KITCHEN INC: $15,000 over 1y, 9.1% of budgetWORLD RELIEF CORP OF NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF EVANGELICALS: $13,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKEATONS PLACE: $10,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetTABITHA MINISTRY: $10,000 over 1y, 5.4% of budget100 MAN PROJECT INC: $10,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetSPIRIT HORSE RANCH RESCUE AND EDUCATION INC: $8,000 over 1y, 8.2% 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 Randolph County Family Crisis Center Inc ↗
  • Who funds VICTORY JUNCTION GANG CAMP INC ↗
  • Who funds ASHEBORO SHELTER OF HOPE ↗
  • Who funds EMILY'S KIDS FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds OUR DAILY BREAD KITCHEN INC ↗
  • Who funds WORLD RELIEF CORP OF NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF EVANGELICALS ↗
  • Who funds KEATONS PLACE ↗
  • Who funds TABITHA MINISTRY ↗
  • Who funds 100 MAN PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds SPIRIT HORSE RANCH RESCUE AND EDUCATION 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.

Timken Foundation of CantonOH13.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Timken Foundation of Canton · Duke Energy Foundation · Network for Good · 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 The H Clay and Wavie M Presnell Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The H Clay and Wavie M Presnell Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 67%
  • World Relief Corp of National Association of Evangelicals: 67% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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 H Clay and Wavie M Presnell Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to The H Clay and Wavie M Presnell Foundation 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 33 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-PF 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 H Clay and Wavie M Presnell’s filings →

More from the funding graph