Skip to content

· Public charity

1890 Universities Foundation

To advance agricultural research,scientific knowledge and information sharing among universities through scientific meetings, symposiums,colloquia and seminars.

$673k
Granted FY2024still arriving
10
Grants FY2024still arriving
9
States reached
$114k
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 2024.

Education$5.6M
02FY2024 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k5 grants · $156k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $507k
$85,057
Median grant
9
States reached
$4.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY AND A&M COLLEGE$114,410
ALABAMA A&M UNIVERSITY$113,554
TUSKEGEE UNIVERSITY$102,983
FLORIDA A&M UNIVERSITY$91,302
LANGSTON UNIVERSITY$85,057
TENNESSEE STATE UNIVERSITY$48,112
UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND EASTERN SHORE$36,635
LINCOLN UNIVERSITY$28,249
NC A&T STATE UNIVERSITY$25,000
CENTRAL STATE UNIVERSITY$17,917
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 (FY21–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 84% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%DELAWARE STATE UNIVERSITY: $48k → 11%PRAIRIE VIEW A&M UNIVERSITY: $98k → 14%LANGSTON UNIVERSITY: $197k → 12%UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AT PINE BLUFF: $170k → 22%FLORIDA A&M UNIVERSITY: $91k → 19%TUSKEGEE UNIVERSITY: $245k → 32%TENNESSEE STATE UNIVERSITY: $234k → 14%NC A&T STATE UNIVERSITY: $105k → 16%FORT VALLEY STATE UNIVERSITY: $175k → 18%CENTRAL STATE UNIVERSITY: $179k → 9%WEST VIRGINIA STATE UNIVERSITY: $314k → 18%ALCORN STATE UNIVERSITY: $115k → 34%SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY AND A&M COLLEGE: $114k → 19%UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND EASTERN SHORE: $226k → 22%KENTUCKY STATE UNIVERSITY: $248k → 14%DELAWARE STATE UNIVERSITY: $27k → 11%PRAIRIE VIEW A&M UNIVERSITY: $73k → 14%LANGSTON UNIVERSITY: $85k → 12%UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AT PINE BLUFF: $41k → 22%FLORIDA A&M UNIVERSITY: $61k → 19%TUSKEGEE UNIVERSITY: $103k → 32%TENNESSEE STATE UNIVERSITY: $77k → 14%NC A&T STATE UNIVERSITY: $46k → 16%FORT VALLEY STATE UNIVERSITY: $27k → 18%CENTRAL STATE UNIVERSITY: $98k → 9%WEST VIRGINIA STATE UNIVERSITY: $154k → 18%ALCORN STATE UNIVERSITY: $87k → 34%SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY AND A&M COLLEGE: $87k → 19%UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND EASTERN SHORE: $149k → 22%KENTUCKY STATE UNIVERSITY: $172k → 14%DELAWARE STATE UNIVERSITY: $26k → 11%PRAIRIE VIEW A&M UNIVERSITY: $27k → 14%LANGSTON UNIVERSITY: $41k → 12%FLORIDA A&M UNIVERSITY: $57k → 19%TUSKEGEE UNIVERSITY: $102k → 32%TENNESSEE STATE UNIVERSITY: $69k → 14%NC A&T STATE UNIVERSITY: $27k → 16%CENTRAL STATE UNIVERSITY: $27k → 9%WEST VIRGINIA STATE UNIVERSITY: $62k → 18%ALCORN STATE UNIVERSITY: $39k → 34%SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY AND A&M COLLEGE: $49k → 19%UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND EASTERN SHORE: $91k → 22%FLORIDA A&M UNIVERSITY: $37k → 19%TENNESSEE STATE UNIVERSITY: $48k → 14%NC A&T STATE UNIVERSITY: $25k → 16%CENTRAL STATE UNIVERSITY: $18k → 9%UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND EASTERN SHORE: $37k → 22%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.

Which US states its grants reach

OH
MO
KY
WV
VA
MD
DE
AR
TN
NC
OK
LA
MS
AL
GA
TX
FL
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.
$5.6M · 18 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

18 repeat relationships: 10 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
0

Total granted

$5.6M
$0

Still filing today

17%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

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

  • WV
    WEST VIRGINIA STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
    3× · 2021–2023 · $530k · revenue +98%
  • TU
    Tuskegee University
    3× · 2022–2024 · $450k · revenue +17%
  • DS
    DELAWARE STATE UNIVERSITY
    3× · 2021–2023 · $101k · revenue +29%

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
    04the grantee network

    3 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. 3 of the 18 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.

    0
    Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
    0
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    3/3
    Grantees still filing
    3/3
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    WEST VIRGINIA STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $530,240 · OtherWEST VIRGINIA STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONUNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND COLLEGE PARK: $502,918 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND COLLEGE PARKAlabama A&M University: $454,307 · OtherAlabama A&M UniversityLINCOLN UNIVERSITY: $430,043 · OtherLINCOLN UNIVERSITYTennessee State University: $428,169 · OtherTennessee State UniversityKENTUCKY STATE UNIVERSITY: $419,613 · OtherKENTUCKY STATE UNIVERSITYLANGSTON UNIVERSITY: $323,542 · OtherLANGSTON UNIVERSITYCENTRAL STATE UNIVERSITY: $320,860 · OtherCENTRAL STATE UNIVERSITYSOUTHERN UNIVERSITY-BATON ROUGE: $249,890 · OtherFLORIDA AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL UNIVERSITY TERM: $245,290 · OtherALCORN STATE UNIVERSITY: $240,738 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AT PINE BLUFF: $210,867 · OtherNORTH CAROLINA A & T STATE UNIVERSITY: $203,411 · OtherFORT VALLEY STATE UNIVERSITY: $201,794 · OtherPRAIRIE VIEW A AND M UNIVERSITY: $198,203 · Other+1 more: $102,421 · OtherTuskegee University: $450,144 · EducationTuskegee Un…DELAWARE STATE UNIVERSITY: $100,935 · EducationDELAWARE ST…
    Other$5,062,306Education$551,079

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

    25%50%75%100%$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWEST VIRGINIA STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $530,240 over 3y, 2.8% of budgetTuskegee University: $450,144 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetDELAWARE STATE UNIVERSITY: $100,935 over 3y, 0.0% 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 WEST VIRGINIA STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
    • Who funds Tuskegee University ↗
    • Who funds DELAWARE STATE UNIVERSITY ↗

    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.

    National Collegiate Athletic AssociationIN30× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: National Collegiate Athletic Association · Strada Education Foundation Inc · Tuskegee University · Thurgood Marshall College Fund · American Chemical Society · Folds of Honor Foundation · National 4-H Council · Delaware State University · Tulsa Community Foundation · Executive Leadership Council · Hispanic Scholarship Fund · The Howard University

    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 1890 Universities Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from 1890 Universities Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

    2025
    ’20’21’22’23’24’25
    no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 16%
    • Delaware State University: 16% of 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, FY20–25
    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 18 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 1890 Universities’ filings →

    More from the funding graph