Skip to content
International Fresh Produce Association at a glance

· Public charity

International Fresh Produce Association

The mission of the INTERNATIONAL FRESH PRODUCE ASSOCIATION is to ensure a meeting place for industry members, customers, suppliers and groups to exchange ideas and to network; to promote to government and the media the interests of sellers of commercial quantities of fresh fruits and vegetables and floral products; to educate the public…

$1.0M
Granted FY2025still arriving
17
Grants FY2025still arriving
10
States reached
$149k
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 2025.

Environment$2.0MFood & Nutrition$697kEducation$327kHealth$133kCommunity Improvement$35k
02FY2025 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 17 grants below total $789,002, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,004,744 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $215,742 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 $10k5 grants · $43k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $184k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $562k
$34,241
Median grant
10
States reached
$59M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ILLINOIS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY$148,665
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA BOARD OF TRUSTEES$106,070
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA BOARD OF TRUSTEES$99,313
ALCORN STATE UNIVERSITY$75,387
USDA AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICES$72,088
MEASURE TO IMPROVE LLC$60,936
COGENT3D INC$40,006
REUSABLE PACKAGING ASSOCIATION$35,049
FREHNER-JENS LLC$34,241
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA$29,935
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA BOARD OF TRUSTEES$27,996
TOTEM LLC$16,478
HENDERSON FARMS INC$9,797
CLC FARMS$9,450
JEANAE DUBOIS$9,388
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 (FY22–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 85% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%WINTERMUTE BIOMEDICAL INC: $128k → 11%DONE-AGAIN FARMS INC: $15k → 8%S&S FARMS: $15k → 10%USDA AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICES: $281k → 10%LORILEE P HENDERSON IRREVOCABLE TRUST: $15k → 11%VILLA CREEK INC: $15k → 12%JAS FAMILY FARMS ORGANICS: $15k → 12%NORTH SIDE FARMS INC: $15k → 14%DELANDA LLC: $15k → 14%TRIPLE C FARMERS LLC: $15k → 15%WONDERFUL NUT RANCHES III LLC: $15k → 18%CARDOZA AND CARDOZA FARMING COMPANY: $15k → 19%CORNELL UNIVERSITY: $48k → 16%FOOD SAFETY CONSULTING & TRAINING SOLUTIONS LLC: $42k → 21%REUSABLE PACKAGING ASSOCIATION: $35k → 14%CENTRAL COAST CITRUS GP: $15k → 10%CROPTRAK: $87k → 8%TOTEM LLC: $123k → 9%OKANAGAN SPECIALITY FRUITS: $15k → 14%FREHNER-JENS LLC: $34k → 7%ILLINOIS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $178k → 14%ALCORN STATE UNIVERSITY: $75k → 34%ROBBEN ORCHARDS COMPANY LLC: $15k → 10%USDA AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICES: $72k → 10%505 SOUTH LLC: $15k → 11%TABLAS CREEK VINEYARD A CA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP: $15k → 12%CLC FARMS: $15k → 12%UPPER BUTTE FARMS: $15k → 14%TUTTI FRUTI FARMS INC: $15k → 14%TERKILDSEN RANCH LLC: $15k → 16%WONDERFUL NUT RANCHES II LLC: $15k → 18%DWAYNE A CARDOZA RANCHES INC: $15k → 19%FOOD SAFETY CONSULTING & TRAINING SOLUTIONS LLC: $28k → 21%COGENT3D INC: $40k → 8%TOTEM LLC: $16k → 9%ILLINOIS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $149k → 14%ALCORN STATE UNIVERSITY: $34k → 34%ROBBEN RANCH: $15k → 10%GARY W HENDERSON IRREVOCABLE TRUST: $15k → 11%JUSTIN VINEYARDS & WINEYARDS: $15k → 12%C&G FARMS INC: $15k → 12%JAY COLOMBINI RANCH INC: $15k → 12%EVANS FARMING LLC: $15k → 14%WONDERFUL NUT ORCHARDS LLC: $15k → 18%LAS COLINAS VINEYARD LLC: $15k → 12%MEASURE TO IMPROVE LLC: $333k → 12%STEPHAN VINEYARDS INC: $15k → 12%MEASURE TO IMPROVE LLC: $61k → 12%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
MT
IL
NY
OR
WY
PA
CA
DE
NC
DC
MS
GA
TX
FL
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.

66%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.1M · 11 repeat orgs$1.1M to everyone else

11 repeat relationships: 10 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
59

Total granted

$2.1M
$999k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+1%
+14%

Still filing today

9%
5%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $88k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
EducationFood & NutritionCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
    2× · 2024–2025 · $409k
  • MT
    MEASURE TO IMPROVE LLC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $393k
  • AR
    AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE
    2× · 2024–2025 · $353k

Funded once

  • FF
    FOUNDATION FOR FRESH PRODUCE BY IFPA INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $124k · revenue ×11
  • Cornell University
    one grant, 2024 · $48k · revenue +14%
  • 5S
    505 SOUTH LLC
    one grant, 2024 · $30k
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

5 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. 5 of the 74 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
5/5
Grantees still filing
3/5
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA: $409,388 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF FLORIDAMEASURE TO IMPROVE LLC: $393,480 · OtherMEASURE TO IMPROVE LLCAGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE (USDA): $353,159 · OtherAGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE (USDA)TOTEM LLC: $139,722 · OtherWINTERMUTE BIOMEDICAL INC: $132,764 · OtherCROPTRAK: $126,738 · OtherALCORN STATE UNIVERSITY: $109,475 · Other+62 more: $989,617 · Other+62 moreIllinois Institute of Technology: $326,659 · EducationIllinois Inst…Cornell University: $48,160 · EducationCornell Unive…FOUNDATION FOR FRESH PRODUCE BY IFPA INC: $123,500 · Food & NutritionAGRICULTURE AND LAND BASED TRAINING ASSOCIATION: $9,096 · Food & NutritionREUSABLE PACKAGING ASSOCIATION: $35,049 · Community Improvement
Other$2,654,343Education$374,819Food & Nutrition$132,596Community Improvement$35,049

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 budgetIllinois Institute of Technology: $326,659 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR FRESH PRODUCE BY IFPA INC: $123,500 over 1y, 20% of budgetCornell University: $48,160 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetREUSABLE PACKAGING ASSOCIATION: $35,049 over 1y, 6.0% of budgetAGRICULTURE AND LAND BASED TRAINING ASSOCIATION: $9,096 over 1y, 0.3% 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 Illinois Institute of Technology ↗
  • Who funds FOUNDATION FOR FRESH PRODUCE BY IFPA INC ↗
  • Who funds Cornell University ↗
  • Who funds REUSABLE PACKAGING ASSOCIATION ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 100%
  • Foundation for Fresh Produce By Ifpa Inc: 100% 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)
1rely 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 74 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 International Fresh Produce Association’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