Skip to content
West Virginia Community Development Hub Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

West Virginia Community Development Hub Inc

The hub supports communities in west virginia in their efforts to experience purposeful, self-directed development respectful of local culture and values.

$1.6M
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
—
States reached
$393k
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, FY2018 to 2024.

Community Improvement$1.9MEducation$233kArts & Culture$62kHousing & Shelter$52kFood & Nutrition$35kYouth Development$10kPublic Benefit$8kScience & Tech$5kOther$0
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 7 grants below total $1,079,990, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,593,153 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $513,163 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

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $90k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $597k
  • $250k+1 grant · $393k
$139,888
Median grant
—
States reached
$2.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NEW RIVER GORGE REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY$393,420
ADVANTAGE VALLEY INC$248,174
MARSHALL UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CORPORATION$208,864
WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CORPORATION$139,888
WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY$42,969
THE VIRGINIA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND$31,675
AFV EDUCATE$15,000
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 (FY18–20) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 16%. 55% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 16%AYRES ASSOCIATES INC: $30k → 12%HARDY COUNTY CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU: $10k → 13%CITY OF KINGWOOD: $9k → 14%LOST CREEK FARM: $35k → 15%PRO ON TRAC: $8k → 16%ALL ABOARD GRAFTON: $7k → 16%LEWIS COUNTY COMMISSION: $8k → 18%VANNOSTRAND ARCHITECTS PLLC: $13k → 19%BOONE CO COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEV CORP: $6k → 19%WEST VIRGINIA SOBER LIVING: $5k → 19%EDWARD TUCKER ARCHITECTS INC: $10k → 19%MEADOW RIVER VALLEY ASSOCIATION: $8k → 20%FRIENDS OF WETZEL COUNTY: $8k → 21%BLUEFIELD WEST VIRGINIA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY: $15k → 21%TOWN OF COWEN: $28k → 24%TOWN OF MOOREFIELD: $11k → 13%MAIN STREET KINGWOOD: $8k → 14%M O R E: $8k → 15%WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY: $10k → 19%NEW RIVER GORGE REGIONAL TRAIL ALLIANCE: $5k → 20%GLADE DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT COMITTEE: $5k → 24%MOOREFIELD HIGH SCHOOL - HARDY COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION: $5k → 13%WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CORPORATION: $5k → 19%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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.0M · 13 repeat orgs$303k to everyone else

13 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
20

Total granted

$2.0M
$303k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
+15%

Still filing today

54%
20%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Community ImprovementHousing & ShelterEducationEnvironmentArts & CultureRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • MU
    MARSHALL UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CORPORATION
    2× · 2023–2024 · $318k · revenue +15%
  • WV
    WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CORPORATION
    3× · 2018–2024 · $233k · revenue +39%
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF WETZEL COUNTY
    2× · 2020–2022 · $23k · revenue +3%

Funded once

  • IA
    INVEST APPALACHIA INC
    one grant, 2022 · $70k · revenue +15%
  • LC
    LOST CREEK FARM
    one grant, 2020 · $35k
  • AA
    AYRES ASSOCIATES INC
    one grant, 2019 · $30k
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
Red River Economic Development

Economic Development and Tourism Promotion in Eastern Kentucky

Community Improvement
2
Morris County Economic Development Alliance
Community Improvement
3
Mount Vernon Development Company Inc
—
4
Valley County Economic Develop Dba West Central Mtn Eco Develo

Economic development for the west central mountain idaho region

Community Improvement
5
Advantage Valley Community Development Corp
Community Improvement
6
Martinsivlle-Hc Chamber Partnership for Economic Growth

Private funds and support for economic development in martinsville-henry county

Community Improvement
7
Sky Valley Chamber of Commerce

Community and Business support to encourage economic progress and support business growth.

—
8
Developing Howard County

Promote economic developement

Community Improvement
9
Lewisburg Foundation Incorporated
—
10
Van Wert Area Economic Development Corporation
Community Improvement
11
Central Vermont Economic Development Corp

Industrial and commercial development.

—
12
Appalachian Resource Conservation & Development Council

The conserving of natural resources and improving rural economies through leadership and education.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Grant County Convention Visitors; the most unlike its peers is Morgantown Sober Living 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

13 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. 13 of the 33 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/13
Grantees still filing
6/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NEW RIVER GORGE REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY: $631,557 · OtherNEW RIVER GORGE REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYAdvantage Valley Inc: $303,101 · OtherAdvantage Valley IncAFV EDUCATE INC: $260,078 · OtherAFV EDUCATE INCSTATE OF WEST VIRGINIA: $61,323 · Other+19 more: $291,454 · Other+19 moreMARSHALL UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CORPORATION: $317,638 · Community ImprovementMARSHALL UNIVERSI…MEADOW RIVER VALLEY ASSOCIATION INC: $22,533 · Community ImprovementMEADOW RIVER VALL…Grant County Convention Visitors: $15,050 · Community Improvement+1 more: $10,000 · Community ImprovementWEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CORPORATION: $233,334 · EducationWEST VIRGIN…INVEST APPALACHIA INC: $69,750 · EnvironmentVirginia Community Development Fund Inc: $56,420 · Housing & ShelterMORGANTOWN SOBER LIVING INC: $5,000 · Housing & ShelterFRIENDS OF WETZEL COUNTY: $22,533 · Arts & CultureMOUNTAIN STATE TRAIL ALLIANCE INC: $5,000 · Recreation & Sports
Other$1,547,513Community Improvement$365,221Education$233,334Environment$69,750Housing & Shelter$61,420Arts & Culture$22,533Recreation & Sports$5,000

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 budgetMARSHALL UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CORPORATION: $317,638 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetAdvantage Valley Inc: $303,101 over 2y, 21% of budgetAFV EDUCATE INC: $260,078 over 2y, 91% of budgetWEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CORPORATION: $233,334 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetINVEST APPALACHIA INC: $69,750 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetVirginia Community Development Fund Inc: $56,420 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetMEADOW RIVER VALLEY ASSOCIATION INC: $22,533 over 2y, 59% of budgetFRIENDS OF WETZEL COUNTY: $22,533 over 2y, 17% of budgetGrant County Convention Visitors: $15,050 over 1y, 8.6% of budgetHardy Co Convention&Visitor Bureau: $10,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetMORGANTOWN SOBER LIVING INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.7% 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 MARSHALL UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds Advantage Valley Inc ↗
  • Who funds AFV EDUCATE INC ↗
  • Who funds WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds INVEST APPALACHIA INC ↗
  • Who funds Virginia Community Development Fund Inc ↗
  • Who funds MEADOW RIVER VALLEY ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF WETZEL COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds Grant County Convention Visitors ↗
  • Who funds Hardy Co Convention&Visitor Bureau ↗
  • Who funds KINGWOOD MAIN STREET PROGRAM INC ↗
  • Who funds MOUNTAIN STATE TRAIL ALLIANCE INC ↗
  • Who funds MORGANTOWN SOBER LIVING 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.

The Greater Kanawha V…The West Virginia Hum…West Virginia Univers…Claude Worthington Be…
The Greater Kanawha Valley FoundationWV17.4× affinity6 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Greater Kanawha Valley Foundation · The West Virginia Humanities Council Inc · West Virginia University Research Corporation · Claude Worthington Benedum 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 West Virginia Community Development Hub Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from West Virginia Community Development Hub Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%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
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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 33 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 West Virginia Community Development Hub’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