Skip to content

· Private foundation

Delta Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$117k
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$32k
Largest
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Environment$243kFood & Nutrition$174kPhilanthropy$131kHealth$100kCrime & Legal$86kArts & Culture$85kEmployment$55kYouth Development$47kOther$0
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $6k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $111k
$15,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$3.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UC Berkeley Foundation$32,000
Missouri State University$21,500
Loveland Youth Gardners$16,100
Heart J Center$15,000
Andean Textile Arts$15,000
Individual grant recipient$11,500
Farmer to Farmer$5,000
Phelps School for Gifted Education$988
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:

Its human-services grants (FY17–22, $86k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%Seattle Community Law Center: $35k → 9%Benefits Law Center: $20k → 9%Benefits Law Center: $15k → 9%Seattle Community Law Center: $9k → 9%Seattle Community Law Center: $7k → 9%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

WA
WI
NY
CA
CO
MO
NM
DC
OK
TX
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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$933k · 15 repeat orgs$104k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +94% since the first grant, against +74% for those funded once.

15 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
10

Total granted

$933k
$92k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+94%
+74%

Still filing today

53%
20%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $12k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Arts & CultureHuman ServicesEmploymentYouth DevelopmentEnvironmentAnimalsOther
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

  • FT
    Farmer to Farmer Inc
    7× · 2017–2024 · $116k · revenue +94%
  • BL
    BENEFITS LAW CENTER
    5× · 2017–2022 · $86k · revenue +16%
  • LY
    Loveland Youth Gardeners
    4× · 2017–2024 · $47k · revenue +154%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2023 · $20k
  • RC
    Rausser College of Natural Sciences
    one grant, 2020 · $20k
  • TT
    The Taimaka Project
    one grant, 2022 · $15k
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
Land Stewardship Project

The land stewardship project (lsp) was organized on june 1, 1982, as a division of the national catholic rural life conference and in 1983 was incorporated under the minnesota (mn) nonprofit corporation act. lsp is supported primarily by…

Environment
2
Development in Gardening

Development in Gardening is improving the nutrition and livelihoods of some of the world's most uniquely marginalized people by teaching them to plant regenerative gardens that grow health, wealth, and a sense of belonging.

Community Improvement
3
Omaha Botanical Center Inc

We believe in thoughtful, ecologically-minded practices and the curation of accessible, educational, and inspirational experiences that enhance lives.

Environment
4
Multinational Exchange for Sustainable a Mesa andor Mesa Inc

MESA connects and cultivates sustainable farmers and food systems leaders around the world.

Education
5
Institute for Agriculture & Trade Policy

Iatp works locally and globally at the intersection of policy and practice to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.

Food & Nutrition
6
Oregon Agricultural Trust

Oregon agricultural trust partners with farmers and ranchers to protect agricultural lands for the benefit of oregons economy, communities, and landscapes.

Environment
7
Sustainable Growers
—
8
Farmers' Legal Action Group Inc

Farmers' Legal Action Group, Inc., is a nonprofit corporation located in Saint Paul, Minnesota, which operates a law center that provides legal services and support to America's family farmers and their communities to help keep farmers on…

—
9
UpRoot Colorado

UpRoot Colorado works to increase nutrition security in Colorado by harvesting and redistributing surplus agricultural crops while supporting the resilience of farmers and creating opportunities for volunteers to learn about and connect…

Food & Nutrition
10
Friends of Global Crop Diversity Ltd Friends of Global Crop Diversity Ltd

Longterm conservationavailability of plant genetic res

Philanthropy
11
Center for the study of the Americas

Within the Americas promoting dialogue and research, producing studies and reports, conducting courses and conferences particularly in the areas of agroecology and food security

—
12
Rainforest Alliance Inc

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.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Farestart; the most unlike its peers is Habitot Childrens Museum. 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

10 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. 10 of the 26 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Missouri State University: $195,505 · OtherMissouri State UniversityUC Berkeley Foundation: $130,951 · OtherUC Berkeley FoundationFarmer to Farmer Inc: $115,565 · OtherFarmer to Farmer IncGREEN PLATE SPECIAL: $58,000 · OtherGREEN PLATE SPECIALAAAS: $50,000 · OtherAAASHeart J Center: $50,000 · OtherHeart J Center+12 more: $103,581 · Other+12 moreBENEFITS LAW CENTER: $85,827 · Human ServicesBENEFITS …ANDEAN TEXTILE ARTS INC: $66,071 · Arts & CultureHabitot Childrens Museum: $9,000 · Arts & CultureFARESTART: $55,000 · EmploymentLoveland Youth Gardeners: $46,600 · Youth DevelopmentMissouri Prairie Foundation: $36,000 · EnvironmentTHE TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE FOUNDATION: $32,000 · AnimalsOklahoma State University Foundation: $2,000 · Education
Other$703,602Human Services$85,827Arts & Culture$75,071Employment$55,000Youth Development$46,600Environment$36,000Animals$32,000Education$2,000

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 budgetFarmer to Farmer Inc: $115,565 over 7y, 6.7% of budgetBENEFITS LAW CENTER: $85,827 over 5y, 3.7% of budgetANDEAN TEXTILE ARTS INC: $66,071 over 6y, 10% of budgetGREEN PLATE SPECIAL: $58,000 over 5y, 4.4% of budgetFARESTART: $55,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetLoveland Youth Gardeners: $46,600 over 4y, 13% of budgetMissouri Prairie Foundation: $36,000 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetTHE TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE FOUNDATION: $32,000 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetHabitot Childrens Museum: $9,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetOklahoma State University Foundation: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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 Farmer to Farmer Inc ↗
  • Who funds BENEFITS LAW CENTER ↗
  • Who funds ANDEAN TEXTILE ARTS INC ↗
  • Who funds GREEN PLATE SPECIAL ↗
  • Who funds FARESTART ↗
  • Who funds Loveland Youth Gardeners ↗
  • Who funds Missouri Prairie Foundation ↗
  • Who funds THE TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Habitot Childrens Museum ↗
  • Who funds Oklahoma State University Foundation ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA5× affinity6 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    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 26 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Delta’s filings →

    More from the funding graph