Skip to content
Tucker Community Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Community foundation

Tucker Community Foundation

Public foundation to benefit tucker county, west virginia.

$2.4M
Granted FY2025still arriving
27
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$622k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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.

Public Benefit$4.9MRecreation & Sports$1.5MEducation$1.5MHealth$321kArts & Culture$134kEnvironment$106kReligion$80kFood & Nutrition$79kOther$0
02FY2025 · 27 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 27 grants below total $1,459,092, the rows itemized in this filing. The $2,438,689 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $979,597 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k8 grants · $52k
  • $10k–50k14 grants · $265k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $261k
  • $250k+2 grants · $881k
$12,480
Median grant
2
States reached
$38M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CITY OF PARSONS$622,418
PARSONS PARK BOARD INC$258,591
FIVE RIVERS LIBRARY$135,300
RANDOLPH COUNTY CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER$65,634
ST JOHNS LUTHERAN CHURCH$59,579
TUCKER COUNTY SCHOOLS$34,969
DAVIS HEALTH SYSTEMS$28,255
CHALLENGED ATHLETES OF WV$27,200
GARRETT MENTORS$26,323
WVU MEDICINE CHILDREN'S$23,500
PHILIPPI PUBLIC LIBRARY$22,830
FRIENDS OF THE ELKINSRANDOLPH PUBLIC LIBRARY$18,536
TUCKER COUNTY FAMILY RESOURCE$14,000
MOUNTAIN LAUREL LEARNING CO-OP$12,480
TUCKER COUNTY YOUNG LIFE$12,191
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 (FY18–25, $101k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, 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%NEW VISION RENEWABLE ENERGY: $13k → 20%TUCKER COUNTY FAMILY RESOURCE: $18k → 16%TUCKER COUNTY FAMILY RESOURCE: $14k → 16%TUCKER COUNTY FAMILY RESOURCE: $13k → 16%TUCKER COUNTY FAMILY RESOURCE: $10k → 16%TUCKER COUNTY FAMILY RESOURCE: $10k → 16%TUCKER COUNTY FAMILY RESOURCE: $9k → 16%TUCKER COUNTY FAMILY RESOURCE NETWO: $5k → 16%NORTH CENTRAL COMMUNITY ACT: $5k → 16%NORTH CENTRAL COMMUNITY ACTION: $5k → 16%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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$10M · 36 repeat orgs$360k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +15% since the first grant, against +11% for those funded once.

36 repeat relationships: 23 still active in FY2025, 13 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

36
19

Total granted

$10M
$330k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+15%
+11%

Still filing today

44%
32%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $31k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentEducationHuman ServicesArts & CultureFood & NutritionHealthOther
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

  • DH
    DAVIS HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATION INC
    8× · 2018–2025 · $194k · revenue +177%
  • GM
    GARRETT MENTORS INC
    5× · 2021–2025 · $162k · revenue +1% · 51% of their budget
  • DS
    DISABLED SPORTS USA-CHALLENGED ATHLETES OF WV
    8× · 2017–2025 · $136k · revenue +78% · 33% of their budget

Funded once

  • GC
    GRANT COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY INC
    one grant, 2017 · $50k
  • GC
    GRANT COUNTY COMMISSION
    one grant, 2017 · $50k
  • WM
    WVU MEDICINE CHILDREN'S
    one grant, 2022 · $47k
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
Grandview Volunteer Fire Dept Inc

Providing public fire protection and emergency rescue services.

—
2
Wilderness Volunteer Fire Department Inc

WVFD provides fire suppression and rescue services to the communities of Nicholas County, WV and surrounding areas.

Public Safety & Disaster
3
Greenwood Volunteer Fire Department

Fire and rescue services

Public Safety & Disaster
4
Burnsville Volunteer Fire Department

Mission for burnsville vfd burnsville wv the burnsville vfd provides fire protection fire safety and emergency rescue services to the citizens in its designated area. bvfd serves in a safe efficient manner serving all stakeholders.

Public Safety & Disaster
5
Williamsburg Volunteer Fire Department

Volunteer fire department

Public Safety & Disaster
6
Moorefield Volunteer Fire Company

Volunteer fire company providing fire protection and emergency rescue services to hardy county, wv

Public Safety & Disaster
7
New Creek Volunteer Fire Department

To serve the new creek fire district of mineral county, wv; to provide fire protection and fire suppression services to the area; to provide basic and advanced life support to the community with utilization of two ambulances and other…

Public Safety & Disaster
8
Blue Ridge Mountain Volunteer Fire Co

To provide volunteer fire, rescue and ambulance service to the mountain area of jefferson county, wv and surrounding areas.

—
9
Wv Helping Hands
Human Services
10
Middleway Volunteer Fire Company

To provide volunteer fire, rescue and ambulance services to the residents of the counties of jefferson and berkeley, wv.

Public Safety & Disaster
11
Reader Volunteer Fire Department Inc

To provide volunteer fire, rescue & emergency services to the community of reader wv.

Public Safety & Disaster
12
New Manchester Volunteer Fire Department Inc

Fire fighting

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is North Central Wv Community Action Assoc Inc; the most unlike its peers is Davis Volunteer Fire Department 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

26 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 26 of the 59 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)
9
Early backer (in before they grew)
25/26
Grantees still filing
18/26
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CITY OF PARSONS: $5,506,163 · OtherCITY OF PARSONSPARSONS PARK BOARD INC: $1,559,854 · OtherPARSONS PARK BOARD INCFIVE RIVERS LIBRARY: $782,264 · OtherFIVE RIVERS LIBRARY+43 more: $1,789,568 · Other+43 moreGARRETT MENTORS INC: $161,572 · EducationWEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $92,750 · EducationKUMP EDUCATION CENTER: $15,357 · EducationDAVIS HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATION INC: $194,196 · PhilanthropyAppalachian Expeditions Inc: $52,467 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF THE CHEAT INC: $44,421 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF BLACKWATER INC: $6,134 · EnvironmentTucker County Family Resource Network Inc: $77,400 · Human ServicesNEW VISION RENEWABLE ENERGY INC: $13,372 · Human ServicesNorth Central WV Community Action Assoc Inc: $10,000 · Human ServicesRANDOLPH COUNTY CHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER INC: $92,722 · Crime & LegalMountain Laurel Learning Cooperative: $41,030 · Youth DevelopmentYOUNG LIFE: $12,191 · Youth Development
Other$9,637,849Education$269,679Philanthropy$194,196Environment$103,022Human Services$100,772Crime & Legal$92,722Youth Development$53,221

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 budgetDAVIS HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATION INC: $194,196 over 8y, 8.3% of budgetGARRETT MENTORS INC: $161,572 over 5y, 51% of budgetDISABLED SPORTS USA-CHALLENGED ATHLETES OF WV: $135,591 over 8y, 33% of budgetWEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $92,750 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetRANDOLPH COUNTY CHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER INC: $92,722 over 5y, 19% of budgetHOSPICE CARE CORPORATION D/B/A WEST VIRGINIA CARING: $78,306 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetTucker County Family Resource Network Inc: $77,400 over 8y, 2.0% of budgetCANAAN VALLEY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INCER PROGRAM INC: $57,280 over 6y, 6.6% of budgetAppalachian Expeditions Inc: $52,467 over 7y, 15% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE CHEAT INC: $44,421 over 4y, 2.3% of budgetMountain Laurel Learning Cooperative: $41,030 over 3y, 24% of budgetPOTOMAC HIGHLANDS FOOD AND FARM INITIATIVE: $35,023 over 2y, 18% of budgetRANDOLPH COUNTY COMMUNITY ARTS COUNCIL: $29,705 over 3y, 9.3% of budgetST GEORGE MEDICAL CLINIC INC: $18,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetNEW VISION RENEWABLE ENERGY INC: $13,372 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetPARSONS VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INCORPORATION: $12,300 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetYOUNG LIFE: $12,191 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMOUNTAIN HOSPICE INC: $8,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetDAVIS VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $7,245 over 1y, 5.9% of budgetBLACKWATER MINISTERIAL ASSOCIATION: $6,200 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetFRIENDS OF BLACKWATER INC: $6,134 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetTHE OLD BRICK PLAYHOUSE COMPANY: $5,000 over 1y, 2.0% 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 DAVIS HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds GARRETT MENTORS INC ↗
  • Who funds DISABLED SPORTS USA-CHALLENGED ATHLETES OF WV ↗
  • Who funds WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds RANDOLPH COUNTY CHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds HOSPICE CARE CORPORATION D/B/A WEST VIRGINIA CARING ↗
  • Who funds Tucker County Family Resource Network Inc ↗
  • Who funds CANAAN VALLEY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INCER PROGRAM INC ↗
  • Who funds Appalachian Expeditions Inc ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE CHEAT INC ↗
  • Who funds Mountain Laurel Learning Cooperative ↗
  • Who funds POTOMAC HIGHLANDS FOOD AND FARM INITIATIVE ↗
  • Who funds RANDOLPH COUNTY COMMUNITY ARTS COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds ST GEORGE MEDICAL CLINIC INC ↗
  • Who funds KUMP EDUCATION CENTER ↗

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.

Oakland Foundation IncPallottine Foundation…Claude Worthington Be…Amazonsmile Foundation
Oakland Foundation IncVT15.5× affinity5 shared granteesties to 2 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Oakland Foundation Inc · Pallottine Foundation of Buckhannon West Virginia · Claude Worthington Benedum Foundation · 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 Tucker Community Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Tucker Community Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%4%15%34%60%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
    1get no government money at all
    9report 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 59 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Tucker’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