Skip to content
Heifer Project International at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Heifer Project International

The organization's mission is to end hunger and poverty and care for the earth.

$81M
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$4.1M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Food & Nutrition$33M
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $6,544,011, the rows itemized in this filing. The $81,319,658 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $74,775,647 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $9k
  • $250k+3 grants · $6.5M
$1,884,509
Median grant
2
States reached
$313M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CYPRESS VALLEY MEAT COMPANY 1 LLC$4,125,404
ARKANSAS SUSTAINABLE LIVESTOCK COOPERATIVE (C-CORP)$1,884,509
ARKANSAS SUSTAINABLE LIVESTOCK COOPERATIVE (C-CORP)$525,000
ROBINSON PASTURE PIGS$9,098
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 99% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%ROOT CAPITAL: $180k → 8%RODALE INSTITUTE: $60k → 11%THE NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $40k → 17%CYPRESS VALLEY MEAT COMPANY 1 LLC: $4.1M → 15%FOODSHED FARMS CSA: $371k → 17%NATURAL STATE PROCESSING LLC: $86k → 20%ARKANSAS SUSTAINABLE LIVESTOCK COOPERATIVE (C-CORP): $5.2M → 22%ROBINSON PASTURE PIGS: $9k → 30%MIDSOUTH FOODSHED LLC: $25k → 17%BLUE RIDGE WOMEN IN AGRICULTURE INC: $85k → 21%MARICARMEN POWELL-ARNUDTS: $60k → 23%CYPRESS VALLEY MEAT COMPANY 1 LLC: $438k → 15%FOODSHED FARMS CSA: $165k → 17%ARKANSAS SUSTAINABLE LIVESTOCK COOPERATIVE (C-CORP): $3.3M → 22%BLUE RIDGE WOMEN IN AGRICULTURE INC: $78k → 21%CYPRESS VALLEY MEAT COMPANY 1 LLC: $400k → 15%ARKANSAS SUSTAINABLE LIVESTOCK COOPERATIVE (C-CORP): $3.1M → 22%BLUE RIDGE WOMEN IN AGRICULTURE INC: $25k → 21%CYPRESS VALLEY MEAT COMPANY 1 LLC: $188k → 15%ARKANSAS SUSTAINABLE LIVESTOCK COOPERATIVE (C-CORP): $3.1M → 22%CYPRESS VALLEY MEAT COMPANY 1 LLC: $130k → 15%ARKANSAS SUSTAINABLE LIVESTOCK COOPERATIVE (C-CORP): $3.0M → 22%CYPRESS VALLEY MEAT COMPANY 1 LLC: $62k → 15%ARKANSAS SUSTAINABLE LIVESTOCK COOPERATIVE (C-CORP): $2.8M → 22%ARKANSAS SUSTAINABLE LIVESTOCK COOPERATIVE (C-CORP): $1.9M → 22%ARKANSAS SUSTAINABLE LIVESTOCK COOPERATIVE (C-CORP): $1.6M → 22%ARKANSAS SUSTAINABLE LIVESTOCK COOPERATIVE (C-CORP): $1.1M → 22%ARKANSAS SUSTAINABLE LIVESTOCK COOPERATIVE (C-CORP): $525k → 22%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.

Grants abroad, by region: $8.2M on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 3 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

East Asia and the Pacific$4.9M · 60% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: PROVIDE LIVESTOCK AND AGRICULTURE TRAINING TO IMPROVE LIVES.

South America$2.7M · 33% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: PROVIDE LIVESTOCK AND AGRICULTURE TRAINING TO IMPROVE LIVES.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$525k · 6% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING GRANT

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. 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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$33M · 5 repeat orgs$460k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +369% since the first grant, against +22% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
6

Total granted

$33M
$451k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+369%
+22%

Still filing today

20%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $9k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Food & NutritionInternationalEnvironmentOther
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

  • AS
    ARKANSAS SUSTAINABLE LIVESTOCK COOPERATIVE (C-CORP)
    9× · 2017–2025 · $26M
  • CV
    CYPRESS VALLEY MEAT COMPANY 1 LLC
    6× · 2019–2025 · $5.3M
  • AF
    ARKANSAS FOODSHED COOPERATIVE
    2× · 2019–2020 · $1.2M

Funded once

  • RC
    ROOT CAPITAL INC
    one grant, 2017 · $180k · revenue 0%
  • NS
    NATURAL STATE PROCESSING LLC
    one grant, 2023 · $86k
  • MP
    MARICARMEN POWELL-ARNUDTS
    one grant, 2024 · $60k
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
04the grantee network

4 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. 4 of the 12 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
4/4
Grantees still filing
3/4
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ARKANSAS SUSTAINABLE LIVESTOCK COOPERATIVE (C-CORP): $25,553,211 · OtherARKANSAS SUSTAINABLE LIVESTOCK COOPERATIVE (C-CORP)CYPRESS VALLEY MEAT COMPANY 1 LLC: $5,343,304 · OtherCYPRESS VALLEY MEAT COMPANY 1 LLCARKANSAS FOODSHED COOPERATIVE: $1,222,665 · Other+5 more: $716,596 · OtherBLUE RIDGE WOMEN IN AGRICULTURE: $188,000 · Food & NutritionRodale Institute: $60,000 · Food & NutritionROOT CAPITAL INC: $180,000 · InternationalNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $40,000 · Environment
Other$32,835,776Food & Nutrition$248,000International$180,000Environment$40,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBLUE RIDGE WOMEN IN AGRICULTURE: $188,000 over 3y, 27% of budgetROOT CAPITAL INC: $180,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetRodale Institute: $60,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $40,000 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 BLUE RIDGE WOMEN IN AGRICULTURE ↗
  • Who funds ROOT CAPITAL INC ↗
  • Who funds Rodale Institute ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 9%
  • Root Capital Inc: 9% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
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 12 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Heifer Project International’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home