Skip to content

· Public charity

Aglaunch Initiative

Aglaunch attracts, creates and grows agtech startups, facilitates the development of new agriculture and food value-chains, and builds collaborative farmer networks, with a commitment to intentional inclusion.

$360k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$120k
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, FY2022 to 2025.

Food & Nutrition$1.5MCommunity Improvement$53kScience & Tech$50kEmployment$44kEducation$25k
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 10 grants below total $343,441, the rows itemized in this filing. The $359,537 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $16,096 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 $10k3 grants · $16k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $105k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $223k
$25,575
Median grant
5
States reached
$636k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
The Seam$120,313
SEDCOR$52,500
Possum Technologies$50,000
North Carolina A&T State University$43,763
Delta Harvest LLC$25,575
HBCU CDAC$25,000
Diligence Technologies Inc$10,175
Gillian Ag Research$5,600
Agricenter International Inc$5,355
Ruddenklau Farms LLC$5,160
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 (FY22–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 99% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 14%WINROCK SOLUTIONS: $35k → 17%Delta Harvest LLC: $26k → 25%HBCU CDAC: $25k → 15%Ruddenklau Farms LLC: $5k → 11%SEDCOR: $53k → 14%Gillian Ag Research: $6k → 9%TENNESSEE STATE UNIVERSITY: $54k → 14%Diligence Technologies Inc: $10k → 15%THE SEAM LLC: $559k → 17%North Carolina A&T State University: $44k → 16%MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY: $81k → 24%TENNESSEE STATE UNIVERSITY: $53k → 14%THE SEAM LLC: $274k → 17%MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY: $61k → 24%Possum Technologies: $50k → 14%THE SEAM LLC: $187k → 17%MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY: $17k → 24%The Seam: $120k → 17%Agricenter International Inc: $5k → 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.

85%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.4M · 3 repeat orgs$258k to everyone else

3 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
1

Total granted

$1.4M
$35k

Still filing today

0%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 35% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $223k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
InternationalEducationFood & NutritionOther
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

  • TS
    THE SEAM LLC
    4× · 2022–2025 · $1.1M
  • MS
    MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY
    3× · 2022–2024 · $159k
  • TS
    Tennessee State University
    2× · 2023–2024 · $107k

Funded once

  • WI
    WINROCK INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT
    one grant, 2022 · $35k · revenue +7%
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

4 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. 4 of the 13 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
4/4
Grantees still filing
2/4
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE SEAM LLC: $1,141,490 · OtherTHE SEAM LLCMISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY: $159,341 · OtherMISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITYTennessee State University: $107,092 · OtherTennessee State University+7 more: $192,773 · Other+7 moreWINROCK INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT: $34,555 · InternationalHBCU COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACTION COALITION: $25,000 · EducationAGRICENTER INTERNATIONAL INC: $5,355 · Food & Nutrition
Other$1,600,696International$34,555Education$25,000Food & Nutrition$5,355

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSTRATEGIC ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF THE MID-WILLAMETTE VALLEY: $52,500 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetWINROCK INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT: $34,555 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAGRICENTER INTERNATIONAL INC: $5,355 over 1y, 0.1% 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 STRATEGIC ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF THE MID-WILLAMETTE VALLEY ↗
  • Who funds WINROCK INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT ↗
  • Who funds HBCU COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACTION COALITION ↗
  • Who funds AGRICENTER INTERNATIONAL INC ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Aglaunch Initiative funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Aglaunch Initiative. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’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 23%
  • Hbcu Community Development Action Coalition: 23% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
1report 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 13 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 Aglaunch Initiative’s filings →

More from the funding graph