· Public charity
Association of State & Territorial Public Health Nutrition Directors
Membership organization to promote optimal nutritional status of all americans
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 62% of ASSOCIATION OF STATE & TERRITORIAL PUBLIC HEALTH NUTRITION DIRECTORS’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 4 grants below total $123,157 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $129,998 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $6,841 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Individual grant recipient | $40,450 |
| CENTER FOR COMMUNITY STEWARDS | $38,381 |
| NORTH DAKOTA DEPT OF HEALTH | $28,333 |
| WORTH HIGGINS & ASSOCIATE | $15,993 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY19–19, $6k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
17 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 16 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, 31% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $85k 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
- NCNOURISH COLORADO4× · 2020–2023 · $245k · revenue +115%
SHELBURNE FARMS4× · 2020–2023 · $244k · revenue +257%- FMFRESHFARM MARKETS4× · 2020–2023 · $242k · revenue +114%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2021 · $71k
- MSMICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY BOARDone grant, 2021 · $71k
- OHOREGON HEALTH AUTHORITYone grant, 2021 · $59k
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.
Iatp works locally and globally at the intersection of policy and practice to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.
To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.
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…
Support the development and enhancement of sustainable farming systems through farmer-to-farmer networking, innovation, demonstration, and education.
He fondy food center connects greater milwaukee to local, fresh food- from farm to market to table - so that children learn better, adults live healthier, and communities celebrate cultural food traditions.
Dairy management inc (dmi) was formed in 1995 by the national dairy promotion and research board (ndb) and the united dairy industry association (udia). dmi is a management organization that invests dairy producer checkoff funds in…
The mission of the global alliance for improved nutrition (gain) is to improve the consumption of healthier diets for all, especially the most vulnerable, by improving the availability, affordability, desirability, and sustainability of…
Marbleseed educates, inspires, and empowers farmers to thrive in a sustainable, organic system of agriculture.
Founded in 2007, sierra harvest is building a community that values and eats an abundance of fresh, local, seasonal food; training successful local farmers that are increasing sustainable food production; and creating equitable access to…
The nasda foundation is the only educational and research organization that directly serves the nation's state departments of agriculture. we are a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. our mission is to enhance american food and agricultural…
The non-gmo project offers trustworthy education to the public and provides verification services to consumer brands and retailers with the purpose of empowering people to care for themselves, the planet, and future generations.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Kids Forward Inc and the most unlike its peers is Burr Oak 4-H Club - Michigan State. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
11 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. 11 of the 41 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 NOURISH COLORADO ↗
- Who funds SHELBURNE FARMS ↗
- Who funds FRESHFARM MARKETS ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR COMMUNITY STEWARDSHIP ↗
- Who funds Burr Oak 4-H Club - Michigan State ↗
- Who funds OHIO HEAD START ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds SAN LUIS VALLEY LOCAL FOODS COALITION ↗
- Who funds ALABAMA PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN ↗
- Who funds HEALTH PARTNERS INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds POSTPARTUM SUPPORT INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds KIDS FORWARD 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: WK Kellogg Foundation · 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 Association of State & Territorial Public Health Nutrition Directors 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.
- Postpartum Support International — 43% of income from government
- Shelburne Farms — 3% of income from government
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.