· Public charity
Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maiz y Trigo
Science and innovation for a food and nutrition secure world.cimmyt is a global thought leader and change agent for climate resilient, sustainable, and inclusive agricultural development for a food and nutrition secure future.(see schedule o)cimmyt contributes to the development of a world with healthier and more prosperous people free…
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2018–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 16 grants below total $12,284,843 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $67,151,805 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $54,866,962 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.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k2 grants · $61k
- $50k–250k8 grants · $1.1M
- $250k+6 grants · $11M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| MERCY CORPS | $6,791,080 |
| ADVENTIST DEVELOPMENT AND RELIEF AGENCY INTERNATIONAL | $1,337,397 |
| INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE | $1,187,870 |
| COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY | $1,036,550 |
| CORNELL UNIVERSITY | $423,788 |
| PIONEER HI-BRED INTERNATIONAL INC | $322,459 |
| UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS | $236,921 |
| GEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION | $194,425 |
| PURDUE UNIVERSITY | $164,354 |
| REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA | $138,776 |
| NEW MARKETS LAB | $118,052 |
| UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE | $117,616 |
| MYAGRO FARMS | $100,000 |
| USDA AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE | $54,904 |
| STOCKHOLM ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE US | $30,651 |
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 (FY23–24, $220k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those 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.
Which US states your grants reach
Grants abroad, by region — $55M on the FY2024 return
Schedule F, as filed: 8 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: RESEARCH
Stated purpose: RESEARCH
Stated purpose: RESEARCH
Stated purpose: RESEARCH
Stated purpose: RESEARCH
Stated purpose: RESEARCH
Stated purpose: RESEARCH
Stated purpose: RESEARCH
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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
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.
21 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2024, 9 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, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.5M 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
Cornell University7× · 2018–2024 · $6.2M · revenue +49%- IFINTERNATIONAL FERTILIZER DEVELOPMENT CENTER5× · 2018–2022 · $1.0M · revenue +30%
- GTGEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION4× · 2021–2024 · $962k · revenue +47%
Funded once
- CACORTEVA AGRISCIENCE FOUNDATIONone grant, 2019 · $2.5M · revenue +6%
- QEQUANTITATIVE ENGINEERING DESIGNone grant, 2019 · $159k
- PDPRECISION DEVELOPMENT INCgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $130k · revenue +121%
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.
To reduce poverty, hunger, malnutrition and environmental degradation in the dryland tropics
The agriculture & food systems institute (afsi) is a non-profit organization that advances and disseminates science for public benefit. our mission is to achieve safe and sustainable agri-food systems by providing thought leadership and…
As an organization, the institute of food technologists is focusing its work in four main areas, or "roles and goals." each is wide-reaching and helps to advance our mission.steward for the profession and its community - provide learning,…
Food, feed, fiber, and fuel for the world's 800 million people who suffer from hunger and poverty - this is the formidable task for many countries, development agencies, and other interest groups. of the many strategies that have been…
RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.
AKADEMIYA2063's overall mission is to create, across Africa, state-of-the-art technical capacities to support African Union Member States to achieve the key goals of Agenda 2063 of transforming national economies to boost growth and…
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
As a leading research university with a distinctive commitment to undergraduate education, Rice University aspires to path breaking research, unsurpassed teaching, and contributions to the betterment of our world. It seeks to fulfill this…
Our mission is to encourage facilitate support and engage in scientific investigation and research experimentation and to advance educational and training activities related to agriculture and natural resources throughout the state of…
Ilsi is a global, nonprofit federation dedicated to generating and advancing emerging science and groundbreaking research to ensure foods are safe, nutritious and sustainable, and that they improve planetary and human health and well-being…
RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.
To reduce hunger and poverty, and improve human nutrition in the tropics through research aimed at increasing the eco-efficiency of agriculture
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is International Food Policy Research Institute and the most unlike its peers is Corteva Agriscience Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 34 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
27 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
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 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 27 of the 46 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 Mercy Corps ↗
- Who funds Cornell University ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds CORTEVA AGRISCIENCE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ADVENTIST DEVELOPMENT & RELIEF AGENCY INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL FERTILIZER DEVELOPMENT CENTER ↗
- Who funds GEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds Global Seafood Alliance Inc ↗
- Who funds NEW MARKETS LAB ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds STOCKHOLM ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE US INC ↗
- Who funds PRECISION DEVELOPMENT INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE ALUMNI ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds MYAGRO FARMS ↗
- Who funds Association for the Advancement of Industrial Crops ↗
- Who funds AFRICA SOIL INFORMATION SERVICE ↗
- Who funds The Research Foundation for The State University of New York ↗
- Who funds Research Triangle Institute ↗
- Who funds ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH CENTERS ↗
- Who funds Oklahoma State University Foundation ↗
- Who funds Oregon State University Foundation ↗
- Who funds OAK RIDGE YOUTH DEVELOPMENT CORP dba OAK RIDGE YOUTH DEVELOPMENT SCHOOL ↗
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: Gates Foundation · Cornell University · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maiz y Trigo 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Mercy Corps — 47% of income from government
- Adventist Development & Relief Agency International — 35% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- Oregon State University Foundation — 0% 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maiz y Trigo?
Find your warmest path to Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maiz y Trigo 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.