· Public charity
Appalachian Sustainable Development
To educate residents and farmers of sw virginia and east tennessee the benefits of organic farming and forestry conservation
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k4 grants · $30k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $187k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $420k
- $250k+2 grants · $541k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| COALFIELD DEVELOPMENT | $284,326 |
| APPALACHIAN CENTER FOR ECONOMIC | $257,129 |
| RURAL ACTION | $165,554 |
| SAVANNA INSTITUTE | $142,434 |
| INTERLACE COMMONS | $111,705 |
| UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI | $44,285 |
| BRISTOL'S PROMISE | $35,000 |
| CORNELL COOPERATIVE EXTENSION OF | $30,915 |
| EAST TENNESSEE STATE UNIVERSITY | $28,836 |
| RADFORD UNIVERSITY | $28,269 |
| NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY | $20,119 |
| APPALACHIAN RCD COUNCIL | $8,508 |
| SPROUTING FARMS INC | $7,681 |
| UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA | $7,258 |
| UNITED PLANT SAVERS | $6,151 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 17%. 76% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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.
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.
22 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2024, 10 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $72k 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
- CDCOALFIELD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION5× · 2019–2023 · $406k · revenue +310%
- ICINTERLACE COMMONS INC3× · 2022–2024 · $347k · revenue +14% · 29% of their budget
- RARURAL ACTION INC4× · 2021–2024 · $231k · revenue +197%
Funded once
- MAMOUNTAIN ASSOCIATION FOR COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $71k · revenue +67%
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 center for an agricultural economy supports rural communities and working landscapes by building a more interconnected local food system.
The purpose of this corporation is to promote the connections between agriculture, the environment, and rural communities in order to improve ecological health, economic viability, and rural vitality.
To advance the socioeconomic and environmental well-being of rural communities.
MISSION: bring all of American agriculture together, with farmers and ranchers at the center, to collectively identify and tackle critical, long-term issues. We collaborate, communicate, educate, advocate and utilize science to advance the…
MISSION: bring all of American agriculture together, with farmers and ranchers at the center, to collectively identify and tackle critical, long-term issues. We collaborate, communicate, educate, advocate and utilize science to advance the…
Support small farms and other businesses. Bring sustainable healthy products to the community.
To promote a healthy, viable agriculture.
To improve the health of the environment and communities by advancing organic regenerative agriculture to grow ecological resilience, economic viability and socially just futures for kentucky farmers through educational, technical and…
To help local farms thrive, link farmers to markets and supporters, and build healthy communities through connections to local food.
To build an abundant, resilient, and valued local food system that supports our landscape, our farmers, ranchers, and food artisans, and our community.
To conduct charitable, scientific and educational activities designed to foster the production of food in a manner that is economically viable and environmentally sound and provides for healthy and humanely raised products.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Kentucky Center for Agriculture and Rural Development Inc and the most unlike its peers is Appalachian Resource Conservation & Development Council. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
15 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. 15 of the 26 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 SPROUTING FARMS CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds COALFIELD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds INTERLACE COMMONS INC ↗
- Who funds RURAL ACTION INC ↗
- Who funds Bristols Promise Youth Networking Alliance ↗
- Who funds KENTUCKY CENTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT INC ↗
- Who funds WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds UNLIMITED FUTURE INC ↗
- Who funds MOUNTAIN ASSOCIATION FOR COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY FARM ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds Rural Resources ↗
- Who funds Appalachian Resource Conservation & Development Council ↗
- Who funds RADFORD UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED PLANT SAVERS ↗
- Who funds WHOLESOME WAVE 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: Claude Worthington Benedum Foundation · Rockefeller Family Fund Inc · Mountain Association for Community Economic Development Inc · Coalfield Development Corporation · The Educational Foundation of America · American Heart Association Inc · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
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 Appalachian Sustainable Development 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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.