Skip to content

· Public charity

The Piedmont Environmental Council

Protect and restore the lands and waters of the virginia piedmont, while building stronger, more sustainable communities.

$110k
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Environment$599kFood & Nutrition$79kRecreation & Sports$71kCommunity Improvement$52kEmployment$31kScience & Tech$20kReligion$13kAnimals$6k
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $51,285, the rows itemized in this filing. The $109,911 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $58,626 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $38k
$12,985
Median grant
1
States reached
$12M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
4P FOODS INC$25,000
LEARNING TREE FARM LLC$12,985
JVS FARM INVESTMENTS LLC$7,000
LAKOTA RANCH$6,300
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 34% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%THE PIEDMONT FOUNDATION: $400k → 6%4P FOODS INC: $25k → 8%JVS FARM INVESTMENTS LLC: $7k → 8%VIRGINIA'S UNITED LAND TRUSTS: $13k → 9%RAPPAHANNOCK COUNTY RECREATIONAL AUTHORITY: $16k → 10%CENTER FOR NATURAL CAPITAL: $15k → 10%TOWN OF GORDONSVILLE: $25k → 11%ALLIANCE FOR THE SHENANDOAH VALLEY: $93k → 12%VIRGINIA CONSERVATION NETWORK: $5k → 22%FAUQUIER COUNTY (TRAIL): $30k → 6%4P FOODS INC: $25k → 8%RAPP FLOW: $20k → 10%TOWN OF GORDONSVILLE: $20k → 11%FAUQUIER COUNTY: $13k → 6%CULPEPER SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $50k → 8%SPERRYVILLE COMMUNITY ALLIANCE: $20k → 10%TOWN OF GORDONSVILLE: $12k → 11%LAKOTA RANCH: $6k → 6%RAPPAHANNOCK CENTER FOR EDUCATION: $19k → 10%LEARNING TREE FARM LLC: $13k → 6%RAPPAHANNOCK CENTER FOR EDUCATION: $12k → 10%ELDON FARMS: $9k → 10%RAPPAHANNOCK LEAGUE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION: $8k → 10%RAPPAHANNOCK LEAGUE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION: $5k → 10%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.

17%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$151k · 4 repeat orgs$719k to everyone else

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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
13

Total granted

$151k
$693k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+7%
+144%

Still filing today

25%
54%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 49% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $26k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentCommunity ImprovementEducationPublic BenefitOther
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

  • TO
    TOWN OF GORDONSVILLE
    3× · 2017–2022 · $57k
  • 4F
    4P FOODS INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $50k
  • RI
    RAPPU INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $31k · revenue +7%

Funded once

  • TP
    THE PIEDMONT FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2018 · $400k · revenue -30% · 32% of their budget
  • AF
    ALLIANCE FOR THE SHENANDOAH VALLEYgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $93k · revenue +281%
  • CS
    CULPEPER SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
    one grant, 2018 · $50k
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
Historic Virginia Land Conservancy

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.

Environment
2
Valley Conservation Council

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.

Environment
3
The Vermont River Conservancy Inc

Protect land along rivers, lakes and wetlands of vt; protect public access, wildlife habitat, scenic natural beauty, and ecological integrity.

Human Services
4
The Land Trust of Virginia Inc

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.

Environment
5
New River Land Trust

To conserve the rural, natural, and cultural heritage of the new river region, protecting farms, forests, open spaces, and historic places.

Environment
6
Northern Virginia Conservation Trust

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…

Environment
7
Northern Neck Land Conservancy

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…

Environment
8
Virginia Coalition for Progressive Values

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.

—
9
Land Savers United

To promote and protect the conservation of western virginias natural resources, farms, forests, waterways and rural landscapes

Environment
10
The Virginia Council

To preserve Virginias history and craft the most prosperous future for all of its citizens.

Education
11
Essex County Conservation Alliance

Preservation of essex county virginia's rural characteristics, its scenic lands, natural resources, and historic structures.

Environment
12
James River Association

The mission of the james river association is to be guardian of the james river. we provide a voice for the river and take action to promote conservation and responsible stewardship of its natural resources.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Alliance for the Shenandoah Valley; 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.
04the grantee network

8 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. 8 of the 20 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
7/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE PIEDMONT FOUNDATION: $400,000 · EnvironmentTHE PIEDMONT FOUNDATION+3 more: $27,500 · Environment+3 moreTOWN OF GORDONSVILLE: $57,250 · OtherTOWN OF GORDONSVILLE4P FOODS INC: $50,000 · Other4P FOODS INCCULPEPER SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $50,000 · OtherCULPEPER SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION…FAUQUIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT: $30,000 · OtherFAUQUIER COUNTY GOVERNMENTRAPP FLOW: $19,994 · OtherRAPP FLOWRAPPAHANNOCK COUNTY PARK FOUNDATION: $16,383 · OtherRAPPAHANNOCK COUNTY PARK FOUNDATIONLEARNING TREE FARM LLC: $12,985 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $12,769 · OtherRAPPAHANNOCK LEAGUE FOR: $12,702 · Other+3 more: $21,840 · Other+3 moreALLIANCE FOR THE SHENANDOAH VALLEY: $93,441 · Community ImprovementALLIANCE FOR T…Sperryville Community Foundation: $19,500 · Community ImprovementSperryville Co…RAPPU INC: $30,800 · EducationAMERICAN CLIMATE PARTNERS: $15,000 · Public Benefit
Environment$427,500Other$283,923Community Improvement$112,941Education$30,800Public Benefit$15,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE PIEDMONT FOUNDATION: $400,000 over 1y, 32% of budgetRAPPU INC: $30,800 over 2y, 7.5% of budgetSperryville Community Foundation: $19,500 over 1y, 34% of budgetAMERICAN CLIMATE PARTNERS: $15,000 over 1y, 3.5% of budgetVIRGINIAS UNITED LAND TRUSTS: $12,500 over 1y, 12% of budgetVIRGINIA CONSERVATION NETWORK: $5,000 over 1y, 0.9% 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 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 ↗

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.

Fauquier Health Foundation Dba the Path FoundationVA19.8× affinity7 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fauquier Health Foundation Dba the Path Foundation · Northern Piedmont Community Foundation · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Piedmont Environmental Council funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Piedmont Environmental Council. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%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
    2report 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.

    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 20 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Piedmont Environmental Council’s filings →

    More from the funding graph