· Public charity
Digital Green Foundation
Digital green is creating a world where farmers use technology and data to build prosperous communities.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 3 grants below total $320,065 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $2,722,663 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $2,402,598 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 · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $7k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $313k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| PRECISION DEVELOPMENT | $246,650 |
| INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE | $66,415 |
| ONE ACRE FUND | $7,000 |
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 67% 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.
Which US states your grants reach
Grants abroad, by region — $2.4M on the FY2025 return
Schedule F, as filed: 2 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: COMMUNITY VIDEO, DEVELOPMENT & USE OF DIGITAL TOOLS TO STRENGTHEN FARMER GROUPS AND IMPROVE ACCESS TO LOCALIZED ADVISORY INFORMATION & AG SERVICE PROVIDERS TO IMPROVE AG LIVELIHOODS AND NUTRITION OUTCOMES, INDIA · IMPROVE THE LIVELIHOODS AND RESILIENCE OF SMALL-SCALE FARMERS IN INDIA. THIS IS ACHIEVED BY DEVELOPING AND DEMONSTRATING A MODEL THAT COMBINES DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY AND TRAINING TO ADVANCE THE GROWTH OF EFFICIENT AND INCLUSIVE FARMER PRODUCER ORGANIZATIONS (FPOS), INDIA
Stated purpose: TRAINING COMMUNITY GROUPS & FARMERS: PARTICIPATORY LAND USE PLANNING, FOREST MANAGEMENT & RESTORATION, SUSTAINABLE COFFEE FARMING, ETHIOPIA
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 44% of Digital Green Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
9 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down.
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 FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- PDPRECISION DEVELOPMENT INC6× · 2020–2025 · $2.8M · revenue +65%
COOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC4× · 2017–2020 · $359k · revenue +36%
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED2× · 2023–2024 · $278k · revenue +79%
Funded once
- CDCOLLABORATIVE DEVELOPMENT NETWORKone grant, 2017 · $40k
- DDDIGITAL DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONSone grant, 2017 · $12k
- MIMeridian Institutegraduatedone grant, 2018 · $7k · revenue +203%
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.
See schedule o for a more detailed description of ide's mission statement and achievements.
Ibp works with civil society, governments, international institutions and the private sector to bring about a world in which empowered citizens participate in open, inclusive public budgeting processes to shape policies and practices that…
A nonprofit scientific research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.
The institute for energy research (ier) is a not-for-profit organization that conducts intensive research and analysis on the functions, operations, and government regulation of global energy markets. ier maintains that freely functioning…
Iri advances freedom and democracy worldwide by developing political parties, civic institutions, open elections, democratic governance and the rule of law.
Our mission is to invest in and accelerate the development of the most promising future leaders in biomedical research with global impact.
Middle east investment initiative, inc. (meii) stimulates sustainable economic activity and long-lasting job creation in the middle east and north africa (mena) by designing and deploying finance and technical assistance programs to…
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…
We provide exemplary interdisciplinary programs for a community of scholar-practitioners within a distributed learning model grounded in student-driven inquiry and leading to enhanced knowledge.
Reduce global poverty and improve lives through innovative economic research that drives better policy and practice by the world's top decision makers. we focus on the intersection of developing countries and the governments, institutions…
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
The foreign policy research institute (frpi) is dedicated to producing the highest quality scholarship and nonpartisan policy analysis focused on crucial foreign policy and national security challenges facing the united states. we educate…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is International Food Policy Research Institute and the most unlike its peers is Cornell University. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
9 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. 9 of the 12 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 INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds PRECISION DEVELOPMENT INC ↗
- Who funds COOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds IDEOORG ↗
- Who funds ONE ACRE FUND ↗
- Who funds JSI RESEARCH & TRAINING INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds Cornell University ↗
- Who funds Meridian Institute ↗
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 · Family Health International Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 Digital Green Foundation 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.
- Jsi Research & Training Institute Inc — 69% 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 Digital Green Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Digital Green Foundation 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.