· Public charity
The Piedmont Environmental Council
Protect and restore the lands and waters of the virginia piedmont, while building stronger, more sustainable communities.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 4 grants below total $51,285 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $109,911 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $58,626 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
- Under $10k2 grants · $13k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $38k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| 4P FOODS INC | $25,000 |
| LEARNING TREE FARM LLC | $12,985 |
| JVS FARM INVESTMENTS LLC | $7,000 |
| LAKOTA RANCH | $6,300 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 34% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
4 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 49% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $26k 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
- TOTOWN OF GORDONSVILLE3× · 2017–2022 · $57k
- 4F4P FOODS INC2× · 2023–2024 · $50k
- RIRAPPU INC2× · 2022–2023 · $31k · revenue -21%
Funded once
- TPTHE PIEDMONT FOUNDATIONone grant, 2018 · $400k · revenue -30% · 32% of their budget
- AFALLIANCE FOR THE SHENANDOAH VALLEYgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $93k · revenue +281%
- CSCULPEPER SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICTone grant, 2018 · $50k
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.
Promoting for the benefit of the general public, the preservation, protection and enjoyment of our natural resources, principally in the lower james, york, rappahannock and chowan rivers and surrounding watersheds.
To protect the natural and cultural resources of the greater shenandoah valley region through land conservation, education, and experiences to preserve the life-enriching benefits our land and water provide.
Protect land along rivers, lakes and wetlands of vt; protect public access, wildlife habitat, scenic natural beauty, and ecological integrity.
To operate as ltv for the purpose of promoting the preservation, protection and balanced use of natural, scenic, and historic resources in the commonwealth of virginia through conservation easements and ownership.
To conserve the rural, natural, and cultural heritage of the new river region, protecting farms, forests, open spaces, and historic places.
To promote and protect the conservation of western virginias natural resources, farms, forests, waterways and rural landscapes
The Northern Virginia Conservation Trust saves nearby nature by encouraging and assisting governments and private landowners to preserve and care for natural areas, trails, streams, parks, and historic and cultural resources for the…
Preservation of essex county virginia's rural characteristics, its scenic lands, natural resources, and historic structures.
Northern neck land conservancy's mission is to preserve the rural heritage of the northern neck and essex county by conserving their lands, water, economies and culture for future generations. the land conservancy assists landowners who…
To conserve and protect the natural and historic land and water resources of virginia's capital region for the benefit of current and future generations.
To preserve Virginias history and craft the most prosperous future for all of its citizens.
To establish an effective, long-term and resilient political infrastructure that advocates for and delivers public policy victories which reflect the values held in common by our members.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Alliance for the Shenandoah Valley and the most unlike its peers is Sperryville 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.
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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 20 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 THE PIEDMONT FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ALLIANCE FOR THE SHENANDOAH VALLEY ↗
- Who funds RAPPU INC ↗
- Who funds Sperryville Community Foundation ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CLIMATE PARTNERS ↗
- Who funds VIRGINIAS UNITED LAND TRUSTS ↗
- Who funds THE MONTANA LAND RELIANCE ↗
- Who funds VIRGINIA CONSERVATION NETWORK ↗
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: Fauquier Health Foundation Dba the Path Foundation · Northern Piedmont Community Foundation · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 The Piedmont Environmental Council 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.