Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →
Plinth

· Public charity

Refed Inc

Refed catalyzes the food system toward evidence-based action to stop wasting food for the climate, environment, people, and the economy.

$1.2M
Granted FY2024still arriving
6
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$300k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your fieldRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.

Food & Nutrition$4.7MEnvironment$600kPublic Safety & Disaster$160kHuman Services$114kYouth Development$15kCommunity Improvement$10k
02FY2024 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 6 grants below total $1,010,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $1,236,346 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $226,346 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 · FY2024

  • $50k–250k4 grants · $460k
  • $250k+2 grants · $550k
$200,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$15M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AFTERLIFE AG$300,000
CENTER FOR ECOTECHNOLOGY$250,000
FOOD RESCUE US$200,000
CONNECTEDFRESH COMPANY$100,000
EARTHDAY365 DBA GREEN DINING ALLIANCE$100,000
PRISM$60,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY20–23, $219k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 54% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 10%GROWING PLACES GARDEN PROJECT: $119k → 11%WHITE PONY EXPRESS: $100k → 9%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

ME
VT
WA
MT
MN
NY
MA
OR
PA
NJ
CT
CA
UT
CO
NC
DC
HI
GA
TX
FL

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.

03Your field

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.

1
Sharing Excess

Sharing excess (se) is a philadelphia-based nonprofit that uses surplus food as a solution to scarcity. while over 40 million people in the us face food insecurity, nearly 40% of the nation's food supply is going to waste. our mission is…

Food & Nutrition
2
Extrafood

Food Rescue - The Organization rescues excess fresh food from Bay Area businesses, schools and non-profits and immediately delivers the food to safety net partners - such as senior housing centers, after-school programs, and homeless…

Food & Nutrition
3
Second Chance Foods Inc

Second Chance Foods (SCF or the Organization) is dedicated to reducing food waste by rescuing food that would otherwise be discarded, reducing hunger on a local basis while elevating the health of those served by the program, and reducing…

Food & Nutrition
4
Food Link Inc

Food link is working to create a more equitable food system throughout greater boston by rescuing and distributing high-quality, customized food to under-resourced communities and by advocating for systems change.

Food & Nutrition
5
Wedontwaste Inc

We Dont Waste increases food access and protects the planet by rescuing and repurposing food, while educating and advocating to increase food security and decrease food waste.

Food & Nutrition
6
Waste Not Inc

Waste Not cultivates sustainable food systems that help people and the planet flourish. We do this by eliminating food waste and hunger through innovative community partnerships.

Food & Nutrition
7
Feeding Charlotte Inc

Feeding Charlotte rescues surplus, freshly prepared meals to reduce food waste and feed the hungry. We believe no food should be wasted while people go hungry in our community. To make this possible, we pickup unused, excess freshly…

Food & Nutrition
8
Feeding It Forward Inc

Feeding It Forward works to reduce food waste and alleviate hunger in Napa County through collaboration efforts with other community based organizations. We recover perishable and prepared food from over 50+ donors and deliver it to 40+…

Food & Nutrition
9
Food Bank of Eastern Michigan

The Food Bank of Eastern Michigan's mission is to be the Food Source for people in need. Partnering with organizations to feed the hungry, we advocate and build a community solution to a community problem. By leveraging an abundance of…

Food & Nutrition
10
Foodcircle Foundation
—
11
The Food Bank for Larimer County

To provide food to all in need through community partnerships and hunger relief programs. Our vision is a hunger-free Larimer County.

Food & Nutrition
12
Zero Foodprint

Zero foodprint is mobilizing the food world around agricultural climate solutions. our work aims to create a circular economy that incentivizes practices that actively draw down carbon dioxide and offer our best hope of addressing the…

Food & Nutrition

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Harvest Against Hunger and the most unlike its peers is Eat Greater Des Moines. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyEnvironmental Conservation …Local Food System Organizat…Community FoundationsHealth Access Advocacy and …Food Banks and Pantries
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 19 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%0%<5yr14%8%5–10yr19%44%10–20yr16%14%20–35yr13%31%35–55yr16%3%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%0%<5yr14%8%5–10yr19%43%10–20yr16%15%20–35yr13%32%35–55yr16%3%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/59
the rest of the field
13%
240,396/1,819,506

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

04the grantee network

38 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. 38 of the 52 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
38/38
Grantees still filing
27/38
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

FOOD RESCUE US INC — $300,000 · Food & NutritionFOOD RESCUE US INCSPOONFULS — $151,250 · Food & NutritionSPOONFULSSECOND HARVEST HEARTLAND — $150,000 · Food & NutritionSECOND HARVEST HEARTLANDFOOD FINDERS INC — $150,000 · Food & NutritionFOOD FINDERS INCCITY HARVEST INC — $150,000 · Food & NutritionCITY HARVEST INC412 FOOD RESCUE INC — $100,000 · Food & NutritionTABLE TO TABLE INC — $100,000 · Food & NutritionVERMONT FOODBANK — $100,000 · Food & NutritionBOSTON AREA GLEANERS INC — $100,000 · Food & NutritionALOHA HARVEST — $100,000 · Food & NutritionUpcycled Food Foundation — $100,000 · Food & NutritionFOOD RECOVERY NETWORK INC — $100,000 · Food & NutritionFOOD FORWARD INC — $100,000 · Food & NutritionRe-Plate Inc DBA Replate — $100,000 · Food & NutritionBOULDER FOOD RESCUE — $100,000 · Food & NutritionBrighter Bites Inc — $100,000 · Food & NutritionMOVE FOR HUNGER INC — $100,000 · Food & NutritionCENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA FOOD BANK — $100,000 · Food & Nutrition+1 more — $75,000 · Food & NutritionAFTERLIFE AG — $300,000 · OtherAFTERLIFE AGTRANSPARENT PATH SPC — $187,750 · OtherTRANSPARENT PATH SPCWISELY — $160,000 · OtherWISELYUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS — $150,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVISTREASURE8 LLC — $102,500 · OtherSECOND SERVINGS OF HOUSTON — $100,000 · OtherBLUE EARTH COMPOST — $100,000 · OtherFULL HARVEST TECHNOLOGIES INC — $100,000 · OtherCONNECTEDFRESH COMPANY — $100,000 · OtherBLUECART INC — $100,000 · OtherGOODR INC — $100,000 · OtherHARVEST AGAINST HUNGER — $100,000 · OtherTHE DC CENTRAL KITCHEN INC — $100,000 · Other+10 more — $459,203 · Other+10 moreCENTER FOR ECOTECHNOLOGY INC — $250,000 · EnvironmentCENTER FOR…St Louis Earth Day — $100,000 · EnvironmentSt Louis E…THE WAVE FOUNDATION — $100,000 · EnvironmentTHE WAVE F…Earth Island Institute Inc — $50,000 · EnvironmentEarth Isla…GROWING PLACES GARDEN PROJECT INC — $119,000 · Human ServicesWHITE PONY EXPRESS — $100,000 · Human ServicesPartnership for a Healthier America Inc — $103,500 · Youth DevelopmentDREAMING OUT LOUD INC — $100,000 · Youth DevelopmentSEASHARE — $100,000 · Community ImprovementPresident and Fellows of Harvard College — $94,987 · Education
Food & Nutrition$2,276,250Other$2,159,453Environment$500,000Human Services$219,000Youth Development$203,500Community Improvement$100,000Education$94,987

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetFOOD RESCUE US INC — $300,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetCENTER FOR ECOTECHNOLOGY INC — $250,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetSPOONFULS — $151,250 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetSECOND HARVEST HEARTLAND — $150,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFOOD FINDERS INC — $150,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCITY HARVEST INC — $150,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetGROWING PLACES GARDEN PROJECT INC — $119,000 over 1y, 5.3% of budgetPartnership for a Healthier America Inc — $103,500 over 1y, 4.2% of budget412 FOOD RESCUE INC — $100,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetSECOND SERVINGS OF HOUSTON — $100,000 over 1y, 7.6% of budgetDREAMING OUT LOUD INC — $100,000 over 1y, 4.8% of budgetTABLE TO TABLE INC — $100,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSEASHARE — $100,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetVERMONT FOODBANK — $100,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetBOSTON AREA GLEANERS INC — $100,000 over 2y, 4.6% of budgetSt Louis Earth Day — $100,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetALOHA HARVEST — $100,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetUpcycled Food Foundation — $100,000 over 1y, 39% of budgetFOOD RECOVERY NETWORK INC — $100,000 over 1y, 8.8% of budgetFOOD FORWARD INC — $100,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetRe-Plate Inc DBA Replate — $100,000 over 2y, 4.8% of budgetBOULDER FOOD RESCUE — $100,000 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetBrighter Bites Inc — $100,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetMOVE FOR HUNGER INC — $100,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetTHE WAVE FOUNDATION — $100,000 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetCENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA FOOD BANK — $100,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE DC CENTRAL KITCHEN INC — $100,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetWHITE PONY EXPRESS — $100,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetPresident and Fellows of Harvard College — $94,987 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFOOD CONNECT CO — $75,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetUNITED AGAINST POVERTY INC — $59,916 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetEarth Island Institute Inc — $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
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.

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.

The Albertsons Compan…Claneil Foundation IncThe Kroger Co Zero Hu…Clif Family FoundationMeans Database IncFarmlink ProjectThe Kroger Co Foundat…The Betsy and Jesse F…ImpactassetsincThe Chicago Community…Share Our StrengthSilicon Valley Commun…
The Albertsons Companies FoundationCA18.6× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Albertsons Companies Foundation · Claneil Foundation Inc · The Kroger Co Zero Hunger Zero Waste Foundation · Clif Family Foundation · Means Database Inc · Farmlink Project · The Kroger Co Foundation · The Betsy and Jesse Fink Family Foundation · Impactassetsinc · The Chicago Community Trust · Share Our Strength · Silicon Valley Community Foundation

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 Refed Inc 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%3%10%23%40%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 13%
  • Growing Places Garden Project Inc — 49% of income from government
  • Boston Area Gleaners Inc — 20% of income from government
  • Vermont Foodbank — 13% of income from government
  • Center for Ecotechnology Inc — 9% of income from government
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
12report 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

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 52 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

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 camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines