· Private foundation
The Martha and Hunter Grubb Foundation Inc
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k1 grant · $5k
- $10k–50k35 grants · $745k
- $50k–250k7 grants · $360k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CT NOFA NORTHEAST ORGANIC FARMERS ASSOCIATION OF CT | $60,000 |
| FORA | $50,000 |
| ZERO FOOTPRINT PROJECT INC | $50,000 |
| MAD AGRICULTURE | $50,000 |
| BLACK FARMER FUND INC | $50,000 |
| POTLIKKER CAPITAL | $50,000 |
| RACHEL'S NETWORK INC | $50,000 |
| FLOWERING TREE PERMACULTURE INSTITUTE INC | $25,000 |
| FLORIDA OCEANOGRAPHIC SOCIETY | $25,000 |
| BARD COLLEGE (CENTER FOR FOOD & RESILIENCE ) | $25,000 |
| CONNECTICUT FARMLAND TRUST INC | $25,000 |
| NORTHEAST FARMERS OF COLOR LAND RESIST INC | $25,000 |
| PLEIADES NETWORK INC | $25,000 |
| TERA FARM | $25,000 |
| GLYNWOOD CENTER INC | $25,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY20–21, $60k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 83% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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
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.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +42% since the first grant, against +29% for the ones you funded once.
50 repeat relationships — 41 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $50k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- CSCITY SEED INC5× · 2020–2024 · $400k · revenue +119% · 32% of their budget
- GOGREENWAVE ORGANIZATION CORP5× · 2020–2024 · $175k · revenue +424%
- RNRACHEL'S NETWORK INC4× · 2021–2024 · $175k · revenue +5%
Funded once
- TETHE ELWYN FOUNDATIONone grant, 2021 · $25k · revenue +8%
- EOELWYN OF PENNSYLVANIA AND DELAWAREgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue +29%
- SESAVE ELLIS ISLAND INCone grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue +5%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
Oregon agricultural trust partners with farmers and ranchers to protect agricultural lands for the benefit of oregons economy, communities, and landscapes.
A Greener World empowers sustainable solutions in agriculture, promoting and supporting real-life farming models to the public and offering farmers and ranchers practical guidance, resources and support on achieving truly sustainable…
Development in Gardening is improving the nutrition and livelihoods of some of the world's most uniquely marginalized people by teaching them to plant regenerative gardens that grow health, wealth, and a sense of belonging.
To scale up forest protection and transition to regenerative agriculture by incubating adoption of the Regeneration Hub model. RF fulfills its Mission to catalyze planetary regeneration, empower women & indigenous communities in order to…
EFIs mission is to transform the produce industry and the lives of farmworkers by facilitating collaboration among workers, agricultural employers, retail buyers and consumer advocates.
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.
The mission of the Organic Farmers Association is to provide a strong and unified national voice for domestic certified organic producers so that organic agriculture will become the basis of a viable United States food and agricultural…
NOFA-NH actively promotes organic, regenerative, ecologically sound farming, gardening, eating, and land care practices for healthy communities. NOFA-NH helps people build local, just, and sustainable food systems.
When people, land, and community are as one, all three members prosper; when they relate not as members but as competing interests, all three are exploited. by consulting nature as the source and measure of that membership, the land…
The mission of the California Farmland Trust is to help farmers protect the best farmland in the world.
Food alliance works at the juncture of science, business and values to define and promote sustainability in agriculture and the food industry, and to ensure safe and fair working conditions, humane treatment of animals, and careful…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Soul Fire Farm Institute Inc and the most unlike its peers is Tomkat Ranch Educational Foundation. 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.
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 field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 9% of your grantees by number, and just 7% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
45 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. 45 of the 72 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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.
- Who funds CITY SEED INC ↗
- Who funds GREENWAVE ORGANIZATION CORP ↗
- Who funds RACHEL'S NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds GLYNWOOD CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds MAD AGRICULTURE ↗
- Who funds FLORIDA OCEANOGRAPHIC SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds OCEAN RESEARCH & CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds EQUITY TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds BLACK FARMER FUND INC ↗
- Who funds PLEIADES NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds POTLIKKER CAPITAL ↗
- Who funds YELLOW FARMHOUSE EDUCATION CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Connecticut Farmland Trust Inc ↗
- Who funds NATIVE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds JUBILEE JUSTICE INC ↗
- Who funds FOODSHED CAPITAL ↗
- Who funds NATUREBRIDGE ↗
- Who funds BLACK WOMEN IN ECOLOGY EVOLUTION AND MARINE SCIENCE INC ↗
- Who funds Flowering Tree Permaculture Institute Inc ↗
- Who funds Urban Tilth ↗
- Who funds FAMILY AGRICULTURE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES ↗
- Who funds REGENERATIVE AGRICULTURE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Meridian Institute ↗
- Who funds TOMPKINS CONSERVATION ↗
- Who funds WHITE BUFFALO LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds BERKSHIRE AGRICULTURAL VENTURES INC ↗
- Who funds THE BERRY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds SOUL FIRE FARM INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds Civil Eats ↗
- Who funds REWILD ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Rsf Social Finance Inc · The Schmidt Family Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Impactassetsinc · Clif Family Foundation · The Robert Stern Family Foundation · Community Foundation for San Benito County · The Hunter Grubb Foundation Inc · Maine Community Foundation Inc · Marin Community Foundation · Tomkat Ranch Educational Foundation · 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 The Martha and Hunter Grubb Foundation 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.
- City Seed Inc — 87% of income from government
- Save Ellis Island Inc — 10% of income from government
- Connecticut Farmland Trust Inc — 7% of income from government
- Yellow Farmhouse Education Center Inc — 5% of income from government
- Third Sector New England Inc — 3% of income from government
- Berkshire Agricultural Ventures Inc — 1% of income from government
- Florida Oceanographic Society Inc — 0% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Martha and Hunter Grubb Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to The Martha and Hunter Grubb Foundation Inc 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.