· Private foundation
Virginia S Warner Foundation Inc
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k14 grants · $61k
- $10k–50k8 grants · $125k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| THE HILL SCHOOL | $25,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA | $20,000 |
| YALE SCHOOL OF ART | $20,000 |
| BARD COLLEGE | $15,000 |
| FEEDING AMERICA | $15,000 |
| NPR | $10,000 |
| VIRGINIA OUTDOORS FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| RAPPAHANNOCK TRIBE OF VIRGINIA | $10,000 |
| SMITHSONIAN CONSERVATION BIOLOGY INSTITUTE | $5,000 |
| PIEDMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL | $5,000 |
| BULL RUN MOUNTAINS CONSERVANCY | $5,000 |
| ORION SOCIETY | $5,000 |
| MILLBROOK SCHOOL | $5,000 |
| TIBET HOUSE US | $5,000 |
| PHILOSOPHICAL RESEARCH SOCIETY | $5,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–23, $6k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 16% of those 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +70% since the first grant, against +25% for the ones you funded once.
35 repeat relationships — 21 still active in FY2025, 14 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k 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
- TPTHE PHILOSOPHICAL RESEARCH SOCIETY9× · 2017–2025 · $164k · revenue +70%
- CCCHESAPEAKE CONSERVANCY INC6× · 2018–2023 · $95k · revenue +224%
Feeding America6× · 2020–2025 · $60k · revenue +40%
Funded once
- TJTHE J A Y C FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2021 · $13k · revenue -95%
- CICARNEGIE INSTITUTEgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +62%
- TSTall Ship Providence Foundationone grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue +11%
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.
The wildlands trust works throughout southeastern massachusetts to conserve and permanently protect native habitats, farmland, and lands of high ecologic and scenic value that serve to keep our communities healthy and our residents…
The Land Conservancy of Ridgefield, Inc. ("the Land Conservancy"), founded in 1967, preserves and protects, for the general benefit of the public, Ridgefield, Connecticut's natural resources including land and water resources, the plant…
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
To preserve the unique character and natural resources of harvard.
The organization's mission is to conserve and promote new england's native plants to ensure healthy, biologically diverse landscapes.
Preserving and enhancing the habitat of wildlife, such as sandhill cranes, waterfowl, raptors, which habitat expenses are supported by agricultural activities.
Perc is dedicated to advancing conservation through markets, incentives, property rights, and partnerships.
The adirondack council ensures the ecological integrity (clean water and air, wildlife habitat, etc.), wild character (solitude, scenic beauty, etc.), and vibrant communities of new york's six-million-acre adirondack park. the adirondack…
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
The museum's mission statement is: "to discover, interpret, and disseminate - through scientific research and education - knowledge about human cultures, the natural world, and the universe."
Dutchess land conservancy (dlc) is dedicated to preserving the scenic, agricultural and environmental resources of dutchess county, new york, and the surrounding area. dlc, as a private non-profit land conservation organization, carries…
Sudbury valley trustees, inc. ("the organization") works to protect natural areas and farmland for wildlife and people in the 36 communities that surround the sudbury, assabet, and concord rivers. the organization cares for some of the…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Berkshire Taconic Community Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Parapsychology 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.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 36 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
46 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. 46 of the 62 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 PHILOSOPHICAL RESEARCH SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds CHESAPEAKE CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds Feeding America ↗
- Who funds THE ORION SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds BARD COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds TIBET HOUSE US INC ↗
- Who funds JOHN F KENNEDY CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS ↗
- Who funds THE HILL SCHOOL CORPORATION OF MIDDLEBURG ↗
- Who funds ALLEN-CHASE FOUNDATION DBA EAGLEBROOK SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds BUXTON SCHOOLINC ↗
- Who funds GRANT FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE PIEDMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds BULL RUN MOUNTAINS CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds NEW ENGLAND FORESTRY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds MILLBROOK SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds BLUE RIDGE WILDLIFE CENTER ↗
- Who funds GOOSE CREEK ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds OCH CONSERVATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE J A Y C FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CARNEGIE INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Tall Ship Providence Foundation ↗
- Who funds Alford Land Trust Inc ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR DEMOCRATIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS ↗
- Who funds Parapsychology Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds CONWAY SCHOOL OF LANDSCAPE DESIGN INC ↗
- Who funds THE WILDLIFE CENTER OF VIRGINIA ↗
- Who funds BERKSHIRE BIRD PARADISE INC ↗
- Who funds Wild Earth Society Incorporated ↗
- Who funds Seven Loaves Services Inc ↗
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: The Luminescence Foundation Inc · Dun Foundation · William M Backer Foundation Inc · Alexander Brady Foundation · Frank Mangano Foundation · Berkshire Taconic Community Foundation Inc · MRC Full Circle Foundation · Sacharuna Foundation · McGraw Foundation · Living Springs Foundation · Wise Foundation · The Van Metre Family Foundation Inc
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 Virginia S Warner Foundation Inc 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- New England Forestry Foundation Inc — 88% of income from government
- Chesapeake Conservancy Inc — 27% of income from government
- Greenagers Inc — 7% of income from government
- Berkshire Taconic Community Foundation Inc — 2% of income from government
- The Trustees of Reservations — 2% of income from government
- The Orion Society Inc — 2% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Virginia S Warner Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Virginia S Warner 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.