Skip to content

· Public charity

The Peanut Research Foundation

The Foundation's mission is the promotion of research for the improvement of peanut industry technology.

$443k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$253k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Science & Tech$4.6MFood & Nutrition$775kYouth Development$193kEducation$95kPhilanthropy$42k
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k4 grants · $132k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $55k
  • $250k+1 grant · $253k
$45,536
Median grant
5
States reached
$1.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UGA Research Foundation$253,311
The National Center for Genome Resources$54,651
Lubbock Christian University$45,536
North Carolina State University$43,964
Texas Tech University$26,568
USDA ARS$15,538
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 92% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA: $170k → 16%TEXAS A & M AGRILIFE RESEARCH: $43k → 13%Lubbock Christian University: $46k → 15%The National Center for Genome Resources: $87k → 12%USDA ARS: $70k → 14%HUDSONALPHA INSTITUTE FOR BIOTECHNOLOGY: $128k → 11%AUBURN UNIVERSITY: $63k → 15%NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY: $82k → 8%UGA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $579k → 27%USDA AG RESEARCH SERVICE: $102k → 14%MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY: $34k → 24%REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA: $28k → 16%Texas Agrilife Research: $40k → 13%LUBBOCK CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY: $39k → 15%THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR GENOME RESOURCES: $56k → 12%USDA ARS: $53k → 14%HUDSON ALPHA INSTITUTE FOR BIOTECHNOLOGY: $85k → 11%AUBURN UNIVERSITY: $33k → 15%North Carolina State University: $80k → 8%USDAARS OPERATIONS SECTION: $81k → 17%UGA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $490k → 27%Texas Agrilife Research: $39k → 13%Lubbock Christian University: $35k → 15%The National Center for Genome Resources: $55k → 12%HUDSONALPHA INSTITUTE FOR BIOTECHNOLOGY: $74k → 11%AUBURN UNIVERSITY: $29k → 15%North Carolina State University: $62k → 8%USDAARS OPERATIONS SECTION: $73k → 17%UGA Research Foundation: $414k → 27%TEXAS A&M AGRILIFE RESEARCH: $38k → 13%THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR GENOME RESOURCES: $49k → 12%Hudson Alpha Institute for Biotechnology: $70k → 11%NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY: $51k → 8%USDAARS OPERATIONS SECTION: $43k → 17%UGA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $338k → 27%TEXAS A & M AGRILIFE RESEARCH: $23k → 13%The National Center for Genome Resources: $21k → 12%Hudson Alpha Institute for Biotechnology: $46k → 11%NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY: $48k → 8%UGA Research Foundation: $314k → 27%TEXAS A & M AGRILIFE RESEARCH: $18k → 13%THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR GENOME RESOURCES: $17k → 12%North Carolina State University: $44k → 8%UGA Research Foundation: $253k → 27%NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY: $30k → 8%UGA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $229k → 27%UGA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $219k → 27%UGA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $101k → 27%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

IL
IA
CA
MO
NM
NC
DC
MS
AL
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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$6.1M · 14 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

14 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
0

Total granted

$6.1M
$0

Still filing today

29%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationScience & 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

  • UO
    University of Georgia Research Foundation Inc
    9× · 2017–2025 · $3.0M · revenue +80%
  • HI
    HUDSON-ALPHA INSTITUTE FOR BIOTECHNOLOGY
    6× · 2017–2024 · $407k · revenue +2%
  • LC
    LUBBOCK CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
    5× · 2020–2025 · $140k · revenue +25%

Funded once

    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

    4 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. 4 of the 14 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)
    0
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    4/4
    Grantees still filing
    3/4
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    University of Georgia Research Foundation Inc: $2,952,529 · EducationUniversity of Georgia Research Foundation IncLUBBOCK CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY: $140,198 · EducationAGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE (USDA): $763,289 · OtherAGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE (USDA)IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY: $314,917 · OtherIOWA STATE UNIVERSITYNORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY: $236,490 · OtherNORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITYTEXAS A&M AGRILIFE RESEARCH: $224,032 · OtherTEXAS A&M AGRILIFE RESEARCHUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS: $197,400 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVISNC STATE UNIVERSITY: $181,880 · OtherNC STATE UNIVERSITYTEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY SYSTEM: $133,483 · OtherTEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY SYSTEMAUBURN UNIVERSITY: $125,759 · OtherAUBURN UNIVERSITYUNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA: $93,524 · Other+1 more: $53,524 · OtherHUDSON-ALPHA INSTITUTE FOR BIOTECHNOLOGY: $407,135 · Science & TechHUDSON-ALPHA…THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR GENOME RESOURCES: $284,547 · Science & TechTHE NATIONAL…
    Education$3,092,727Other$2,324,298Science & Tech$691,682

    Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

    25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUniversity of Georgia Research Foundation Inc: $2,952,529 over 9y, 0.3% of budgetHUDSON-ALPHA INSTITUTE FOR BIOTECHNOLOGY: $407,135 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetTHE NATIONAL CENTER FOR GENOME RESOURCES: $284,547 over 6y, 3.6% of budgetLUBBOCK CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY: $140,198 over 5y, 0.1% 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 University of Georgia Research Foundation Inc ↗
    • Who funds HUDSON-ALPHA INSTITUTE FOR BIOTECHNOLOGY ↗
    • Who funds THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR GENOME RESOURCES ↗
    • Who funds LUBBOCK CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY ↗

    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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

    Cornell UniversityNY13.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: Cornell University

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

    2024
    ’20’21’22’23’24’25
    no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%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
      0get no government money at all
      1report 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 14 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 Peanut Research’s filings →

      More from the funding graph