Skip to content
Seeding the Future Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Seeding the Future Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$1.9M
Granted FY2025still arriving
14
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$762k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0198% 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$7.0MEducation$2.5MPhilanthropy$638kEnvironment$402kScience & Tech$186kReligion$150kSocial Science$150kInternational$117kOther$0
02FY2025 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $2k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $50k
  • $50k–250k9 grants · $1.1M
  • $250k+1 grant · $762k
$100,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$41M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS INC$761,741
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY$200,000
INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS INC$200,000
Individual grant recipient$160,000
EXTREME TECH CHALLENGE$135,000
TRUSTEES OF TUFTS COLLEGE$100,000
PROJECT DRAWDOWN$100,000
Individual grant recipient$100,000
Individual grant recipient$75,000
POTSDAM-INSTITUT FUR KLIMAFOLGENFORSCHUNG E V$58,000
GDP RESEARCH ALLIANCE$30,000
INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR FOOD ONTOLOGY OPERABILITY$10,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
Individual grant recipient$1,500
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.

US giving: 87% of grant dollars ($9.7M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 13% that went abroad ($1.5M) is mapped below.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 77% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%TRUSTEES OF TUFTS COLLEGE: $100k → 8%UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION: $200k → 11%NATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST: $250k → 7%FOOD SYSTEM 6 ACCELERATOR INC: $50k → 7%EXTREME TECH CHALLENGE: $135k → 8%THE CLEAR FUND: $25k → 10%THE UCLA FOUNDATION: $60k → 14%THE U C DAVIS FOUNDATION: $150k → 16%FOODSHOT GLOBAL INC: $75k → 17%THE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC: $75k → 14%GDP RESEARCH ALLIANCE: $30k → 14%TRUSTEES OF TUFTS COLLEGE: $100k → 8%UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION: $125k → 11%NATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST: $200k → 7%FOOD SYSTEM 6 ACCELERATOR INC: $50k → 7%THE UCLA FOUNDATION: $60k → 14%THE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC: $75k → 14%INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS INC: $1.2M → 14%TRUSTEES OF TUFTS COLLEGE: $100k → 8%UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION: $125k → 11%NATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST: $170k → 7%FOOD SYSTEM 6 ACCELERATOR INC: $30k → 7%INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS INC: $1.2M → 14%TRUSTEES OF TUFTS COLLEGE: $100k → 8%UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION: $100k → 11%INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS INC: $1.1M → 14%TRUSTEES OF TUFTS COLLEGE: $100k → 8%THE UCLA FOUNDATION: $100k → 14%INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS INC: $150k → 14%TRUSTEES OF TUFTS COLLEGE: $100k → 8%HUMANE AMERICA ANIMAL FOUNDATION: $25k → 14%INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS INC: $50k → 14%TRUSTEES OF TUFTS COLLEGE: $75k → 8%INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHOLOGISTS INC: $40k → 14%TRUSTEES OF TUFTS COLLEGE: $50k → 8%BOUNTIFIELD INTERNATIONAL: $40k → 11%INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS INC: $25k → 14%TRUSTEES OF TUFTS COLLEGE: $50k → 8%INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS INC: $25k → 14%INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS INC: $25k → 14%4 ACCESS PARTNERS: $50k → 11%INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS INC: $25k → 14%MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $200k → 8%NORTH AMERICAN TRADITIONAL INDIGENOUS FOOD SYSTEMS: $30k → 11%SECOND HARVEST HEARTLAND: $500k → 11%SECOND HARVEST HEARTLAND: $250k → 11%SECOND HARVEST HEARTLAND: $125k → 11%SECOND HARVEST HEARTLAND: $125k → 11%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

ME
MN
IL
MI
NY
MA
OH
PA
NJ
CA
MD
TN
NC
DC

Beyond the US: 13% of all-years giving ($1.5M)

3 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
Germany$1.4M · 20 grants
Belgium$82k · 1 grant
Canada$35k · 1 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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 11% of Seeding the Future Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Seeding the Future Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 14% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

89%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$8.7M · 19 repeat orgs$1.1M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +21% since the first grant, against +20% for those funded once.

19 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 14 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
24

Total granted

$8.7M
$904k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+21%
+20%

Still filing today

84%
63%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $223k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Food & NutritionEducationHealthInternationalPhilanthropyScience & TechOther
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

  • IO
    INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS
    6× · 2020–2025 · $4.8M · revenue +68%
  • SH
    SECOND HARVEST HEARTLAND
    3× · 2020–2022 · $1.0M · revenue +17%
  • Trustees of Tufts College
    6× · 2020–2025 · $790k · revenue +39%

Funded once

  • TU
    THE UC DAVIS FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2021 · $150k · revenue +6%
  • CC
    CATHOLIC CHURCH OF ST ANDREAS
    one grant, 2019 · $150k
  • LC
    LEIBNIZ CENTER FOR AGRICULTURAL LANDSCAPE RESEARCH
    one grant, 2024 · $90k
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
Partners in Food Solutions

Improve the food value chain in developing countries by mobilizing corporate volunteers to share knowledge and expertise with small and growing food processors.

International
2
International Food Information Council

To effectively communicate science based information on food safety, nutrition, and health for the public good.

Arts & Culture
3
Foundation for Food and Agriculture Research

Foundation for food and agriculture research connects funders, researchers and farmers through public-private partnerships to support audacious research addressing the biggest food and agriculture challenges.

Food & Nutrition
4
Isf Advisors Inc

Isf advisors is the leading strategic and financial advisory group committed to mobilizing capital for a more sustainable, equitable, and productive global food system.

Food & Nutrition
5
The Global FoodBanking Network

To nourish the world's hungry through uniting and advancing food banks.

International
6
Food Forward Inc

Food forward fights hunger and prevents food waste by rescuing fresh surplus produce, connecting this abundance with people experiencing food insecurity, and inspiring others to do the same.

Food & Nutrition
7
Essential Impact Inc

Essential impact creates breakthrough solutions to tackle malnutrition and transform food systems in sub-saharan africa. we leverage advances in fermentation to create affordable, accessible, and climate-resilient proteins that can be…

Food & Nutrition
8
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
9
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
10
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
11
International Food Policy Research Institute

International food policy research institute's (ifpri) vision is a world free of hunger and malnutrition. ifpri's mission is to provide research-based policy solutions that sustainably reduce poverty and end hunger and malnutrition.

Food & Nutrition
12
The Good Food Institute Inc

To harness the power of food innovation and markets to make the global food system better for the planet, people, and animals by supporting efforts to make alternative proteins accessible, affordable, and delicious.

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is 4 Access Partners; the most unlike its peers is Gdp Research Alliance. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

36 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. 36 of the 50 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
36/36
Grantees still filing
26/36
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS: $4,841,949 · OtherINSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTSIndividual grant recipient: $753,250 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+23 more: $851,400 · Other+23 moreTrustees of Tufts College: $790,000 · EducationTrustees of Tufts Colleg…UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION: $561,350 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA …Massachusetts Institute of Technology: $400,000 · EducationMassachusetts Institute …UCLA FOUNDATION: $320,000 · EducationUCLA FOUNDATIONPROJECT DRAWDOWN: $200,000 · EducationPROJECT DRAWDOWNTHE UC DAVIS FOUNDATION: $150,000 · EducationTHE UC DAVIS FOUNDATIONSECOND HARVEST HEARTLAND: $1,000,000 · Food & NutritionSECOND HARVE…FOOD SYSTEM 6 ACCELERATOR INC: $130,000 · Food & NutritionFOOD SYSTEM …FOODSHOT GLOBAL INC: $75,000 · Food & NutritionFOODSHOT GLO…+6 more: $72,775 · Food & Nutrition+6 moreNATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST: $620,000 · PhilanthropyTHE CLEAR FUND: $25,000 · Philanthropy+2 more: $18,750 · PhilanthropyEXTREME TECH CHALLENGE: $135,000 · Science & TechGDP Research Alliance: $30,000 · Science & TechTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC: $150,000 · Social ScienceBOUNTIFIELD INTERNATIONAL: $86,100 · InternationalWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $10,750 · International+1 more: $750 · International
Other$6,446,599Education$2,421,350Food & Nutrition$1,277,775Philanthropy$663,750Science & Tech$165,000Social Science$150,000International$97,600

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 budgetINSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS: $4,841,949 over 6y, 12% of budgetSECOND HARVEST HEARTLAND: $1,000,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetTrustees of Tufts College: $790,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST: $620,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION: $561,350 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetMassachusetts Institute of Technology: $400,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetUCLA FOUNDATION: $320,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetPROJECT DRAWDOWN: $200,000 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetTHE UC DAVIS FOUNDATION: $150,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC: $150,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEXTREME TECH CHALLENGE: $135,000 over 1y, 22% of budgetFOOD SYSTEM 6 ACCELERATOR INC: $130,000 over 3y, 14% of budgetBOUNTIFIELD INTERNATIONAL: $86,100 over 3y, 3.0% of budgetFOODSHOT GLOBAL INC: $75,000 over 1y, 14% of budget4 ACCESS PARTNERS: $50,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetInternational Center for Food Ontology Operability Data and Semantics: $30,000 over 3y, 4.6% of budgetNorth American Traditional Indigenous Food Systems: $30,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetTHE CLEAR FUND: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHUMANE AMERICA ANIMAL FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetAMERICAN ENDOWMENT FOUNDATION: $18,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINQUIRING SYSTEMS INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $10,750 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetREFED INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetRURAL HEALTH CARE INITIATIVE: $10,000 over 1y, 5.4% of budgetBLYTHEDALE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPhilabundance: $1,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCAN DO CANINES: $1,350 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSAMARITAN'S PURSE: $1,350 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF MINNESOTA: $1,350 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGARDEN SCHOOL FOUNDATION INC: $1,350 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWolfe's Neck Farm Foundation: $750 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $750 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetElijahs Promise Inc: $675 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHOPE THE MISSION: $600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFAIR FOOD NETWORK INC: $600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $600 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.

The Minneapolis Found…Silicon Valley Commun…Windward FundSaint Paul & Minnesot…National Philanthropi…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…Charities Aid Foundat…Vanguard Charitable E…The Bank of America C…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …
The Minneapolis FoundationMN14.1× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Minneapolis Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Windward Fund · Saint Paul & Minnesota Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Seeding the Future Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Seeding the Future Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 14%
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology: 35% of income from government
  • Trustees of Tufts College: 14% of income from government
  • Elijahs Promise Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Seeding the Future Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Seeding the Future 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.

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 50 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-PF 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 Seeding the Future’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