Skip to content
Alliance for Low Input Sustainable at a glance

· Private foundation

Alliance for Low Input Sustainable

A-LIST IS AN INDEPENDENT, NON-PROFIT, INDUSTRY INITIATIVE THAT SEEKS TO MOVE THE DIRECTION OF TURFGRASS BREEDING TOWARD SUSTAINABLE VARIETIES THAT PERFORM THEIR INTENDED FUNCTION WITH FEWER OR MINIMAL MAINTENANCE INPUTS, THUS BENEFITING THE ENVIRONMENT.

$67k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Education$146kRecreation & Sports$25kCommunity Improvement$23kFood & Nutrition$18kScience & Tech$12kEnvironment$10k
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $3k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $64k
$10,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$190k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Ohio State University Dept of Hort$20,000
Olds College Alberta Turfgrass Res$14,161
Oregon State University Ag Life$10,000
Pinnacle Ag Research Center$10,000
Virginia Tech University$10,000
Purdue Horticulture Landscape Arc$2,500
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 (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 88% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%OKLAHOMA PLANT & SOIL SCIENCE DEPT: $250 → 19%MICHIGAN STATE: $4k → 16%GOLF COURSE SUPERINTENDENTS ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA: $2k → 15%Pinnacle Ag Research Center: $10k → 17%UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN: $4k → 10%Agricultural Research Foundation: $4k → 18%UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT FOUNDATION: $12k → 11%NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY: $4k → 8%UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION: $4k → 12%PURDUE UNIVERSITY: $4k → 19%Ohio State University Dept of Hort: $20k → 15%TURFGRASS PRODUCERS INTERNATIONAL: $9k → 7%RUTGERS UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $8k → 8%NEW JERSEY TURFGRASS FOUNDATION: $5k → 12%VIRGINIA GOLF COURSE SUPERINTENDENTS ASSOCIATION: $700 → 6%Virginia Tech University: $10k → 21%UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND: $4k → 11%MICHIGAN TURFGRASS FOUNDATION: $500 → 16%WISCONSIN TURFGRASS FOUNDATION: $3k → 10%Oregon State University Ag Life: $10k → 18%UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT: $8k → 11%NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY: $4k → 8%Purdue Horticulture Landscape Arc: $3k → 19%The Ohio State University: $5k → 15%TURFGRASS PRODUCERS INTERNATIONAL: $8k → 7%RUTGERS UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $8k → 8%NEW JERSEY TURFGRASS FOUNDATION: $4k → 12%VIRGINIA GOLF COURSE SUPERINTENDENTS ASSOCIATION: $500 → 6%VIRGINIA TECH: $4k → 21%NATIONAL TURFGRASS FEDERATION: $6k → 11%WISCONSIN TURFGRASS ASSOCIATION INC: $2k → 10%UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT: $8k → 11%TURFGRASS PRODUCERS INTERNATIONAL: $5k → 7%RUTGERS UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $4k → 8%NEW JERSEY TURFGRASS FOUNDATION: $4k → 12%UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT: $4k → 11%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

IL
WI
MI
OR
IA
IN
OH
NJ
CT
UT
MO
KY
VA
MD
KS
NC
OK
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.

39%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$92k · 7 repeat orgs$141k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +8% since the first grant, against -2% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
18

Total granted

$92k
$75k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+8%
-2%

Still filing today

57%
39%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $67k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Community ImprovementEducationScience & TechRecreation & SportsEnvironmentOther
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

  • TP
    Turfgrass Producers International
    3× · 2019–2021 · $22k · revenue +55%
  • RUTGERS UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION
    3× · 2019–2021 · $20k · revenue +8%
  • VG
    VIRGINIA GOLF COURSE SUPERINTENDENTS ASSOCIATION
    2× · 2020–2021 · $1k · revenue +4%

Funded once

  • TU
    THE UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT FOUNDATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $12k · revenue +104%
  • IS
    IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2023 · $10k
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY RESEARCH FOUNDATIONPLANT AND SOIL SCIENCE DEPARTMENT
    one grant, 2019 · $7k
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
Iowa Turfgrass Institute

Purpose is to foster research, education, and dissemination of information on turfgrass so as to benefit the people of iowa and the environment.

Science & Tech
2
Illinois Turfgrass Endowment Attn Luke Cella
Youth Development
3
Ohio Turfgrass Research Trust Inc
Science & Tech
4
Tri-State Turf Research Foundation Inc

Research in golf turf care and items that effect the health and well being of the grass on golf cources.

Food & Nutrition
5
Virginia Turfgrass Council Inc

Research, education and promotion of the turfgrass industry.

—
6
Trans-Mississippi Turf Scholarship

To promote the study of horticulture and agronomy as it pertains to golf course management.

Education
7
Association of American Plant Food Officials

The association encourages and sponsors adoption of uniform and effective fertilizer inspection techniques by all member agencies, throughout the united states, canada and puerto rico. this includes encouraging and sponsoring the most…

—
8
Turfgrass Association Inc-Tennessee

Turfgrass research

—
9
The Short Grass Foundation

support college golf schorships and education programs

Religion
10
Iowa Brewers Guild

The iowa brewers guild is organized and operated exclusively for non-profit purposes. the association is organized to unify craft brewing professionals, promote iowa beer, and advocate for the industrys growth. the ibg engages in…

Community Improvement
11
Iowa State University Foundation

Aligning donor passion and generosity to advance iowa state university's land grant ideals.

Education
12
American Association of State Colleges and Universities

Aascu is a washington, d.c. based higher education association that represents the sector of over 500 regional public colleges, universities, and systems whose members share a learning and teaching centered culture, a commitment to…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New Jersey Turfgrass Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Golf Course Superintendents Association of America. 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

11 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. 11 of the 31 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)
11/11
Grantees still filing
5/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Ohio State University Dept of Hort: $20,000 · OtherOhio State University Dept of HortUNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT: $20,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUTOlds College Alberta Turfgrass Res: $14,161 · OtherOlds College Alberta Turfgrass ResIOWA STATE UNIVERSITY: $10,000 · OtherIOWA STATE UNIVERSITYPinnacle Ag Research Center: $10,000 · OtherPinnacle Ag Research CenterOregon State University Ag Life: $10,000 · OtherOregon State University Ag LifeVirginia Tech University: $10,000 · OtherVirginia Tech UniversityUNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY: $8,000 · OtherNORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY: $8,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY RESEARCH FOUNDATIONPLANT AND SOIL SCIENCE DEPARTMENT: $6,900 · Other+12 more: $39,750 · Other+12 moreRUTGERS UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $20,000 · EducationRUTGERS UNIVERSITY FO…NEW JERSEY TURFGRASS FOUNDATION INC: $12,750 · EducationNEW JERSEY TURFGRASS …THE UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT FOUNDATION INC: $12,000 · EducationTHE UNIVERSITY OF CON…Turfgrass Producers International: $21,848 · Community ImprovementTurfgrass Prod…NATIONAL TURFGRASS FEDERATION INC: $6,000 · Community ImprovementNATIONAL TURFG…VIRGINIA GOLF COURSE SUPERINTENDENTS ASSOCIATION: $1,200 · Community ImprovementWisconsin Turfgrass Association Inc: $1,500 · Science & TechMIDWEST REGIONAL TURF FOUNDATION: $500 · Recreation & SportsMICHIGAN TURFGRASS FOUNDATION: $500 · Environment
Other$156,811Education$44,750Community Improvement$29,048Science & Tech$1,500Recreation & Sports$500Environment$500

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTurfgrass Producers International: $21,848 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetRUTGERS UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $20,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNEW JERSEY TURFGRASS FOUNDATION INC: $12,750 over 3y, 4.7% of budgetTHE UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT FOUNDATION INC: $12,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAgricultural Research Foundation: $4,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGOLF COURSE SUPERINTENDENTS ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWisconsin Turfgrass Association Inc: $1,500 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetVIRGINIA GOLF COURSE SUPERINTENDENTS ASSOCIATION: $1,200 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetMIDWEST REGIONAL TURF FOUNDATION: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMICHIGAN TURFGRASS FOUNDATION: $500 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 Turfgrass Producers International ↗
  • Who funds RUTGERS UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds NEW JERSEY TURFGRASS FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds THE UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL TURFGRASS FEDERATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Agricultural Research Foundation ↗
  • Who funds GOLF COURSE SUPERINTENDENTS ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA ↗
  • Who funds Wisconsin Turfgrass Association Inc ↗
  • Who funds VIRGINIA GOLF COURSE SUPERINTENDENTS ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds MIDWEST REGIONAL TURF FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds MICHIGAN TURFGRASS FOUNDATION ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Alliance for Low Input Sustainable funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Alliance for Low Input Sustainable. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Rutgers University Foundation: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get 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
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Alliance for Low Input Sustainable?

Find your warmest path to Alliance for Low Input Sustainable 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.

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 31 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-PF 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 Alliance for Low Input Sustainable’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