Skip to content

· Public charity

United Way of Rockingham County Inc

To raise money for county 501(c)3 organizations.

$2.3M
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$1.5M
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, FY2021 to 2025.

Health$2.2MHuman Services$813kYouth Development$399kPublic Safety & Disaster$131kCrime & Legal$110kArts & Culture$37kRecreation & Sports$22k
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $53k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $476k
  • $250k+2 grants · $1.8M
$59,247
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HOSPICE OF ROCK CO$1,512,500
ROCK CO SALVATION ARMY$267,723
AGING DISABILITY AND TRANSIT SERVI$188,777
EDEN BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB$111,812
REIDSVILLE RESCUE SQUAD$59,709
EDEN RESCUE SQUAD$59,247
MADISONMAYODAN RESCUE$56,710
ROCK CO STUDENT HEALTH CNTR$17,240
HELP INC$13,120
EDEN YMCA$12,300
MADISONMAYODAN REC$10,000
REIDSVILLE YMCA$6,741
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 (FY21–25, $119k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 15%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 15%EDEN YMCA: $14k → 17%Eden YMCA: $14k → 17%EDEN YMCA: $14k → 17%EDEN YMCA: $12k → 17%Eden YMCA: $9k → 17%Reidsville YMCA: $13k → 17%REIDSVILLE YMCA: $13k → 17%REIDSVILLE YMCA: $13k → 17%Reidsville YMCA: $9k → 17%REIDSVILLE YMCA: $7k → 17%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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.7M · 12 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

12 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
0

Total granted

$3.7M
$0

Still filing today

75%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’21’22’23’24’25
HealthYouth DevelopmentHuman ServicesOther
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

  • HO
    HOSPICE OF ROCKINGHAM COUNTY INC
    5× · 2021–2025 · $1.8M · revenue +38%
  • AD
    AGING DISABILITY & TRANSIT SERVICES
    5× · 2021–2025 · $276k · revenue +17%
  • UR
    UNC ROCKINGHAM HEALTH CARE INC
    5× · 2021–2025 · $145k · revenue +2%

Funded once

    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
    Roanoke Valley Rescue Squad Inc

    Provide emergency medical services, emergency medical trasportation, and search and rescue of missing persons.

    Health
    2
    North Iredell Rescue Squad Inc

    Rescue Services

    Public Safety & Disaster
    3
    York Regional Emergency Medical Services Inc

    York Regional EMS is an ambulance service organization committed to providing quality emergency medical services to four regional municipalities with a primary response area estimated to be 29 square miles and a corresponding population of…

    —
    4
    Farmville Rescue & Emergency Medical Services Inc

    Emergency Medical Services

    Health
    5
    Richmond County Rescue Squad

    Provide rescue and ambulance services

    —
    6
    Redington-Fairview General Hospital

    Redington-fairview general hospital's mission is to develop, provide, and facilitate quality, safe, comprehensive, cost-effective health services for the people we serve. we affirm a commitment to maintain our unique community hospital…

    Health
    7
    Randolph Regional Ems Corporation

    The mission of Randolph Regional EMS Corporation is to provide the best Emergency care possible servicing our community better.

    Health
    8
    Regional Ambulance Service Inc

    Our mission is serving people first with pride, proficiency and professionalism. We offer emergency, ambulance, and paramedic services for Rutland City and surrounding towns in Vermont.

    Health
    9
    Easton-Greenwich Rescue Squad Inc

    Provision of ambulance and other emergency services to the citizens of Easton and Greenwich, NY and adjoining communities including Salem, Cossayuna, and Schaghticoke.

    Health
    10
    Essex Rescue Inc

    Essex Rescue is committed to being a leader in EMS and to providing our community with excellence in pre-hospital and out of hospital care. We strive for this by maintaining the highest standards of our profession, caring for our patients,…

    Health
    11
    Ash-Rand Rescue Squad & Ems Inc

    Emergency and resecue services to randalph county, north carolina.

    Health
    12
    Rescue Inc

    To serve as a key component of our rural healthcare system and to provide the highest quality, risk appropriate, rapid response emergency medical care and transportation services to our region.

    Health
    How this is measured
    The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Unc Rockingham Health Care Inc; the most unlike its peers is Help Inc Center Against Violence. 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

    9 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. 9 of the 12 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)
    0
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    9/9
    Grantees still filing
    5/9
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    HOSPICE OF ROCKINGHAM COUNTY INC: $1,751,629 · OtherHOSPICE OF ROCKINGHAM COUNTY INCTHE SALVATION ARMY: $397,656 · OtherTHE SALVATION ARMYAGING DISABILITY & TRANSIT SERVICES: $275,582 · OtherAGING DISABILITY & TRANSIT SERVICESReidsville Rescue Squad Inc: $130,785 · OtherHELP INC CENTER AGAINST VIOLENCE: $109,640 · Other+2 more: $88,766 · OtherEDEN RESCUE SQUAD INCORPORATED: $174,596 · HealthEDEN RESCUE S…UNC ROCKINGHAM HEALTH CARE INC: $144,830 · HealthUNC ROCKINGHA…Madison-Rockingham Rescue Squad Inc: $109,573 · HealthMadison-Rocki…BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF EDEN INC: $389,094 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS AND GI…Young Men's Christian Association of Greensboro Inc: $119,397 · Human Services
    Other$2,754,058Health$428,999Youth Development$389,094Human Services$119,397

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

    25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetHOSPICE OF ROCKINGHAM COUNTY INC: $1,751,629 over 5y, 16% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF EDEN INC: $389,094 over 5y, 49% of budgetAGING DISABILITY & TRANSIT SERVICES: $275,582 over 5y, 1.3% of budgetEDEN RESCUE SQUAD INCORPORATED: $174,596 over 5y, 18% of budgetUNC ROCKINGHAM HEALTH CARE INC: $144,830 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetReidsville Rescue Squad Inc: $130,785 over 5y, 48% of budgetYoung Men's Christian Association of Greensboro Inc: $119,397 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetHELP INC CENTER AGAINST VIOLENCE: $109,640 over 5y, 1.9% of budgetMadison-Rockingham Rescue Squad Inc: $109,573 over 5y, 13% 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 HOSPICE OF ROCKINGHAM COUNTY INC ↗
    • Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF EDEN INC ↗
    • Who funds AGING DISABILITY & TRANSIT SERVICES ↗
    • Who funds EDEN RESCUE SQUAD INCORPORATED ↗
    • Who funds UNC ROCKINGHAM HEALTH CARE INC ↗
    • Who funds Reidsville Rescue Squad Inc ↗
    • Who funds Young Men's Christian Association of Greensboro Inc ↗
    • Who funds HELP INC CENTER AGAINST VIOLENCE ↗
    • Who funds Madison-Rockingham Rescue Squad 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.

    Reidsville Area FoundationNC17.9× affinity6 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: Reidsville Area Foundation · North Carolina Community Foundation · Duke Energy 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 United Way of Rockingham County Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from United Way of Rockingham County Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

    2025
    ’20’21’22’23’24’25
    no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
      no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
      0get no government money at all
      6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
      0rely on government for over half their income
      ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
      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 12 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 United Way of Rockingham County’s filings →

      More from the funding graph