Skip to content
Institute of Food Technologists at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Institute of Food Technologists

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, networking and leadership development experiences that enable food science and technology…

$1.4M
Granted FY2024still arriving
10
Grants FY2024still arriving
10
States reached
$28k
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, FY2022 to 2024.

Food & Nutrition$900kEnvironment$125kEducation$74kHealth$14kCommunity Improvement$10k
02FY2024 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 10 grants below total $149,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,399,906 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $1,250,906 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 · FY2024

  • Under $10k5 grants · $29k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $120k
$17,000
Median grant
10
States reached
$58M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-DAVIS$28,000
UV4GOOD$25,000
GLOBAL SEED SAVERS$25,000
TINY SEED PROJECT INC$25,000
NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY$17,000
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE-KNOXVILLE$6,000
SOUTH DAKOTA STATE UNIVERSITY$6,000
LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AND AGRICULTURAL & MECHANICAL COLLEGE$6,000
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON$5,500
CORNELL UNIVERSITY$5,500
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 (FY22–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 83% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%RADICES BIO LLC: $25k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-DAVIS: $28k → 16%CORNELL UNIVERSITY: $6k → 16%HELAINA INC: $10k → 17%CHANDRA ASSOCIATES: $25k → 8%WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $100k → 14%EATWELL MEAL KITS INC: $25k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON: $6k → 10%THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE-KNOXVILLE: $6k → 12%NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY: $14k → 8%INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ENTERPRISES: $100k → 12%UV4GOOD: $25k → 14%INMED PARTNERSHIPS FOR CHILDREN INC: $100k → 4%SOUTH DAKOTA STATE UNIVERSITY: $6k → 13%TINY SEED PROJECT INC: $25k → 12%LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AND AGRICULTURAL & MECHANICAL COLLEGE: $6k → 19%SOLAR FREEZE INC: $150k → 11%WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $25k → 14%NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY: $17k → 8%GLOBAL SEED SAVERS: $25k → 12%FOOD SYSTEMS FOR THE FUTURE INSTITUTE: $250k → 14%INMED PARTNERSHIPS FOR CHILDREN INC: $25k → 4%FOOD SYSTEMS FOR THE FUTURE INSTITUTE: $100k → 14%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

VT
MN
IL
WI
NY
SD
CA
CO
MO
VA
MD
TN
NC
DC
LA
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region: $992k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 7 regions, $944k to organizations and $49k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Sub-Saharan Africa$429k · 43% · 5 grants · 9 people

Stated purpose: GLOBAL FOOD SYSTEMS CHALLENGE · AWARDS

South Asia$250k · 25% · 1 grant · 2 people

Stated purpose: GLOBAL FOOD SYSTEMS CHALLENGE · AWARDS

North America (Canada and Mexico)$152k · 15% · 3 grants · 30 people

Stated purpose: GLOBAL FOOD SYSTEMS CHALLENGE · FEEDING TOMORROW FUND SCHOLARSHIPS · SCHOLARSHIPS

East Asia and the Pacific$123k · 12% · 2 grants · 21 people

Stated purpose: GLOBAL FOOD SYSTEMS CHALLENGE · IFT FIRST 24 STARTUP PAVILION · SCHOLARSHIPS

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$27k · 3% · 1 grant · 7 people

Stated purpose: GLOBAL FOOD SYSTEMS CHALLENGE · SCHOLARSHIPS · AWARDS

Central America and the Caribbean$9k · 1% · 17 people

Stated purpose: AWARDS

South America$2k · 0% · 2 people

Stated purpose: AWARDS

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.

53%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$600k · 3 repeat orgs$523k to everyone else

3 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
8

Total granted

$600k
$374k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-4%
+118%

Still filing today

100%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $149k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24
EducationEnvironmentInternationalFood & NutritionOther
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

  • FS
    FOOD SYSTEM FOR THE FUTURE INSTITUTE
    2× · 2022–2023 · $350k · revenue +191%
  • IP
    INMED PARTNERSHIPS FOR CHILDREN INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $125k · revenue -91%
  • WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $125k · revenue -4%

Funded once

  • SF
    Solar Freeze Incgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $150k · revenue +118% · 75% of their budget
  • ID
    INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ENTERPRISESgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $100k · revenue +33%
  • CA
    CHANDRA ASSOCIATES
    one grant, 2023 · $25k
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
Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition

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…

Food & Nutrition
2
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Foundation

To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.

Animals
3
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
4
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
5
Sweet Farm Foundation

Sweet farm is the world's first nonprofit sanctuary to address the devastating impact that factory farming has on climate change from the perspective of animals, plants, and the planet. we must first understand how these pieces are…

Animals
6
Dairy Management Inc

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…

—
7
Agriculture & Food Systems Institute

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…

Science & Tech
8
Nalanda 20

Improve excellence and access in higher education. Current focus is on India. Thus, Nalanda 2.0's current focus is to make India's higher education system world-class by building a world-class multidisciplinary research university,…

Education
9
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
10
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.

—
11
American Farmland Trust

Saves the land that sustains us by protecting farmland, promoting sound farming practices, and keeping farmers on the land.

Food & Nutrition
12
International Financial Reporting Standards Foundation

The ifrs foundation's mission is to develop ifrs standards that bring transparency, accountability and efficiency to capital markets around the world. our work serves the public interest by fostering trust, growth and long-term financial…

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of Wisconsin Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Solar Freeze Inc. 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

12 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. 12 of the 21 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
8/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FOOD SYSTEM FOR THE FUTURE INSTITUTE: $350,000 · Food & NutritionFOOD SYSTEM FOR THE FUTURE INSTITUTEEATWELL EXCHANGE INC: $25,000 · Food & NutritionEATWELL EXCHANGE INCSolar Freeze Inc: $150,000 · EnvironmentSolar Freeze IncWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $125,000 · EnvironmentWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INCTINY SEED PROJECT INC: $25,000 · EnvironmentTINY SEED PROJECT INCINMED PARTNERSHIPS FOR CHILDREN INC: $125,000 · InternationalINMED PARTNERSHIPS FOR CH…INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ENTERPRISES: $100,000 · InternationalINTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT…GLOBAL SEED SAVERS: $25,000 · InternationalGLOBAL SEED SAVERSUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA- DAVIS: $28,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CA…CHANDRA ASSOCIATES: $25,000 · OtherCHANDRA ASSOCIAT…UV4GOOD: $25,000 · OtherUV4GOODRADICES BIO LLC: $25,000 · OtherRADICES BIO LLCCURATORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI SPECIAL TR: $25,000 · OtherCURATORS OF THE …NC STATE UNIVERSITY: $14,000 · OtherNC STATE UNIVERS…HELAINA INC: $10,000 · OtherHELAINA INCLOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY: $6,000 · OtherTHE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE: $6,000 · OtherNORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $17,000 · EducationSOUTH DAKOTA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $6,000 · EducationCornell University: $5,500 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION: $5,500 · Education
Food & Nutrition$375,000Environment$300,000International$250,000Other$164,000Education$34,000

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 budgetFOOD SYSTEM FOR THE FUTURE INSTITUTE: $350,000 over 2y, 20% of budgetSolar Freeze Inc: $150,000 over 1y, 75% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $125,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetINTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ENTERPRISES: $100,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTINY SEED PROJECT INC: $25,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetEATWELL EXCHANGE INC: $25,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetGLOBAL SEED SAVERS: $25,000 over 1y, 16% of budgetNORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $17,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSOUTH DAKOTA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $6,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCornell University: $5,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION: $5,500 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.

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.

Morgan Stanley Global…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust IncIN7.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Institute of Food Technologists funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Institute of Food Technologists. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    3report 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 21 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Institute of Food Technologists’ 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