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

· Public charity

Whyhunger Inc

Whyhunger believes a world without hunger is possible.

$1.0M
Granted FY2024still arriving
13
Grants FY2024still arriving
10
States reached
$80k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your 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 FY2017–2024.

Food & Nutrition$7.0MEnvironment$360kEducation$68kInternational$20kEmployment$10k
02FY2024 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 13 grants below total $440,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $1,048,412 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $608,412 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

  • $10k–50k10 grants · $240k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $200k
$25,000
Median grant
10
States reached
$6.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MARY MITCHELL FAMILY AND YOUTH CENTER INC$80,000
4DASOIL$60,000
SOUTHERN CONSERVATION PARTNERS INC$60,000
FUSION PARTNERSHIPS INC$30,000
INQUIRING SYSTEMS INC$30,000
RESIST INC$30,000
NC ASSOCIATION OF BLACK LAWYERS LAND LOSS PREVENTION PROJECT$25,000
DETROIT BLACK COMMUNITY FOOD SECURITY NETWORK INC$25,000
HIGHLANDER RESEARCH AND EDUCATION CENTER INC$25,000
OPEN SPACE INSTITUTE$25,000
NATIONAL BLACK FOOD AND JUSTICE ALLIANCE$25,000
TINY SEED PROJECT INC$15,000
HARRY CHAPIN FOUNDATION$10,000
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, $438k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%HOPI TUTSKWA PERMACULTURE INSTITUTE: $15k → 26%OPEN BUFFALO: $48k → 13%GOOD JOURNEY DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $50k → 21%SOMALI BANTU COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION OF MAINE: $10k → 13%HOPI TUTSKWA PERMACULTURE INSTITUTE: $10k → 26%THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST HUNGER INC: $190k → 20%HOPI TUTSKWA PERMACULTURE INSTITUTE: $10k → 26%THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST HUNGER: $70k → 20%HOPI TUTSKWA PERMACULTURE INSTITUTE: $10k → 26%THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST HUNGER INC: $25k → 20%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

AK
ME
VT
NH
WA
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
WY
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CA
CO
MO
MD
AZ
NM
TN
NC
DC
LA
MS
GA
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region — $522k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 7 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Central America and the Caribbean$123k · 24% · 7 grants

Stated purpose: AGROECOLOGY & FOOD PRODUCTION

South Asia$113k · 22% · 4 grants

Stated purpose: AGROECOLOGY & FOOD PRODUCTION · AGROECOLOGY & FOOD PRODUCTION AND TRAVEL GRANTS

South America$107k · 20% · 6 grants

Stated purpose: AGROECOLOGY & FOOD PRODUCTION · AGROECOLOGY & FOOD PRODUCTION AND TRAVEL GRANTS

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$95k · 18% · 4 grants

Stated purpose: AGROECOLOGY & FOOD PRODUCTION

Sub-Saharan Africa$59k · 11% · 4 grants

Stated purpose: AGROECOLOGY & FOOD PRODUCTION · TRAVEL GRANTS

North America (Canada and Mexico)$15k · 3% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: AGROECOLOGY & FOOD PRODUCTION

East Asia and the Pacific$10k · 2% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: AGROECOLOGY & FOOD PRODUCTION

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

68%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$5.0M · 44 repeat orgs$2.3M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +83% since the first grant, against +37% for the ones you funded once.

44 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2024, 31 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

44
58

Total granted

$5.0M
$2.3M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+83%
+37%

Still filing today

91%
74%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’20’21’22’23’24
Food & NutritionCommunity ImprovementEducationEnvironmentHuman ServicesPhilanthropyOther

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

  • IS
    INQUIRING SYSTEMS INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $359k · revenue +74%
  • MM
    MARY MITCHELL FAMILY AND YOUTH CENTER INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $313k · revenue +48%
  • TC
    THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST HUNGER INC
    3× · 2020–2022 · $285k · revenue +186%

Funded once

  • N
    Niweskok
    one grant, 2023 · $485k
  • CF
    Community Food Bank Inc
    one grant, 2020 · $137k · revenue -18%
  • SH
    SECOND HARVEST INLAND NORTHWESTgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $106k · revenue +38%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your 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
Black Urban Farmers Association
Food & Nutrition
2
Food Action

Our mission is to educate, organize and advocate for food and farming systems to become economically prosperous, ecologically sound and socially equitable.

—
3
Nashville Food Project Inc

The nashville food project brings people together to grow, cook, and share nourishing food, with the goals of cultivating community and alleviating hunger in our city.

Food & Nutrition
4
North Country Food Alliance

The mission of North Country Food Alliance is to strengthen food sovereignty in the Twin Cities Metro Area. We do this through two main program areas: foodshare and gardening. Our foodshare program rescues overstock food that would…

Food & Nutrition
5
The Food Alliance

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…

Arts & Culture
6
Common Good City Farm

Common Good City Farm is an urban farm in Washington, DC, where community members source fresh food, see sustainable urban agriculture in action, and learn healthy skills. Our mission is to sustain and support a more equitable community…

Food & Nutrition
7
New Orleans Food Policy Advisory Committee

a Education and outreach for systems change in order to improve equity opportunity and collaboration in the local food system. b Convening and engage individuals organizations and businesses working in the food system.

Food & Nutrition
8
Fair Food Network Inc

Fair food network is organized to grow community health, wealth, and resilience through food, to increase access to affordable healthy food, help local food economies thrive and build resilience in local food and agriculture systems.

Food & Nutrition
9
Black Seeds

prove asset to organic food

Food & Nutrition
10
Ujamaa Farmer Collective Association

Carrying out the policy of Californias to support socially disadvantaged farmers through The Farmers Equity Act and with pending state funding, the mission of Ujamaa Farmer Collective Association is empowering historically underserved…

Community Improvement
11
Seed Peace

To grow the local food supply by supporting farmers, preparing food plants for climate change and increasing health giving food availability for people in need

—
12
Sustainable Growers
—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Neighbors Together Corporation and the most unlike its peers is Harry Chapin 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyPolicy Research and AdvocacyEnvironmental Conservation …Affordable Housing Developm…Faith-Based Liberal Arts Co…Christian Missionary Organi…Community Food PantriesImmigrant Worker SupportLocal Food System Organizat…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 24 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%8%<5yr14%13%5–10yr19%24%10–20yr16%19%20–35yr13%30%35–55yr16%6%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%14%<5yr14%7%5–10yr19%21%10–20yr16%19%20–35yr13%33%35–55yr16%7%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 8% of your grantees by number, and just 14% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 6% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
6%
6/103
the rest of the field
13%
240,390/1,819,462

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

87 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. 87 of the 103 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
32
Early backer (in before they grew)
84/87
Grantees still filing
68/87
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Niweskok — $485,075 · Food & NutritionNiweskokOUR KITCHEN TABLE — $335,000 · Food & NutritionOUR KITCHEN TABLEDetroit Black Community Food Sovereignty Network — $205,000 · Food & NutritionDetroit Black Community Food Sove…Community Food Bank Inc — $136,526 · Food & NutritionCommunity Food Bank IncGREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY — $108,596 · Food & NutritionSECOND HARVEST INLAND NORTHWEST — $106,000 · Food & NutritionFOOD BANK COALITION OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY — $101,714 · Food & NutritionPhilabundance — $99,825 · Food & NutritionMississippi Association of Cooperatives Inc — $90,345 · Food & Nutrition+15 more — $526,321 · Food & Nutrition+15 moreMARY MITCHELL FAMILY AND YOUTH CENTER INC — $312,500 · OtherMARY MITCHELL FAMILY AND YOUTH CENTER I…CENTER FOR IDEAS EQUITY AND TRANSFORMATIVE CHANGE — $226,000 · OtherCENTER FOR IDEAS EQUITY AND TRANSFORMAT…NEIGHBORS TOGETHER CORPORATION — $199,989 · OtherNEIGHBORS TOGETHER CORPORATIONNorth Carolina Association of Black Lawyer Land Loss Prevention Projec — $125,000 · OtherNORTHWEST HARVEST EMM — $118,603 · OtherORGANIZACION BORICUA DE AGRICULTURA ECOLOGICA — $114,352 · OtherRESIST INC — $102,000 · OtherRID-ALL FOUNDATION INC — $91,239 · Other+39 more — $1,305,940 · Other+39 moreINQUIRING SYSTEMS INC — $359,102 · Community ImprovementINQUIRING SYST…FUSION PARTNERSHIP INC — $220,000 · Community ImprovementFUSION PARTNER…NIPMUC INDIAN DEVELOPMENT CORP — $90,000 · Community ImprovementNIPMUC INDIAN …BLACK FARMER FUND INC — $71,700 · Community ImprovementBLACK FARMER F…HILL DISTRICT CONSENSUS GROUP — $63,240 · Community ImprovementHILL DISTRICT …URBAN CORE COLLECTIVE — $50,000 · Community ImprovementURBAN CORE COL…Native American food sovereignty alliance dba NAFSA — $40,000 · Community Improvement+3 more — $25,000 · Community ImprovementSOUTHERN CONSERVATION PARTNERS INC — $249,900 · EnvironmentSOUTHERN C…HIGHLANDER RESEARCH & EDUCATION CENTER INC — $216,000 · EnvironmentHIGHLANDER…TINY SEED PROJECT INC — $115,000 · EnvironmentTINY SEED …OPEN SPACE INSTITUTE INC — $110,000 · EnvironmentOPEN SPACE…+2 more — $20,000 · EnvironmentTHE CAMPAIGN AGAINST HUNGER INC — $284,989 · Human ServicesCOOPERATION JACKSON OF MISSISSIPPI — $60,000 · Human ServicesGOOD JOURNEY DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION — $50,000 · Human ServicesOpen Buffalo Inc — $47,568 · Human ServicesHOPI TUTSKWA PERMACULTURE INSTITUTE — $45,000 · Human Services+1 more — $10,000 · Human Services4DASOIL — $155,000 · EducationBlack Sustainability Inc — $50,000 · EducationFAMILY FARM DEFENDERS INCORPORATED — $30,000 · EducationPurposed Focused Alternative Learning Corporation — $30,000 · EducationINDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK — $25,000 · Education+3 more — $30,000 · EducationTHE PRAXIS PROJECT INC — $90,000 · HealthOURSPACE WORLD INC — $80,000 · Health
Food & Nutrition$2,194,402Other$2,595,623Community Improvement$919,042Environment$710,900Human Services$497,557Education$320,000Health$170,000

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 budgetINQUIRING SYSTEMS INC — $359,102 over 5y, 2.7% of budgetOUR KITCHEN TABLE — $335,000 over 2y, 3.8% of budgetMARY MITCHELL FAMILY AND YOUTH CENTER INC — $312,500 over 5y, 5.1% of budgetTHE CAMPAIGN AGAINST HUNGER INC — $284,989 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetSOUTHERN CONSERVATION PARTNERS INC — $249,900 over 5y, 13% of budgetFUSION PARTNERSHIP INC — $220,000 over 5y, 0.7% of budgetHIGHLANDER RESEARCH & EDUCATION CENTER INC — $216,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetDetroit Black Community Food Sovereignty Network — $205,000 over 4y, 4.1% of budgetNEIGHBORS TOGETHER CORPORATION — $199,989 over 2y, 16% of budget4DASOIL — $155,000 over 2y, 12% of budgetCommunity Food Bank Inc — $136,526 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNorth Carolina Association of Black Lawyer Land Loss Prevention Projec — $125,000 over 5y, 3.6% of budgetNORTHWEST HARVEST EMM — $118,603 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTINY SEED PROJECT INC — $115,000 over 4y, 20% of budgetOPEN SPACE INSTITUTE INC — $110,000 over 3y, 2.8% of budgetGREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY — $108,596 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetSECOND HARVEST INLAND NORTHWEST — $106,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetRESIST INC — $102,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetFOOD BANK COALITION OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY — $101,714 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetPhilabundance — $99,825 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetRID-ALL FOUNDATION INC — $91,239 over 1y, 6.3% of budgetMississippi Association of Cooperatives Inc — $90,345 over 4y, 7.1% of budgetNIPMUC INDIAN DEVELOPMENT CORP — $90,000 over 4y, 50% of budgetTHE PRAXIS PROJECT INC — $90,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR WASHINGTONS FUTURE — $85,000 over 3y, 3.8% of budgetOURSPACE WORLD INC — $80,000 over 2y, 47% of budgetBLACK FARMER FUND INC — $71,700 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetFarmworker Association of Florida Inc — $70,000 over 3y, 3.5% of budgetCOMITE DE APOYO A LOS TRABAJADORES AGRICOLAS INC — $70,000 over 3y, 6.1% of budgetAFRORESISTANCE INC — $67,500 over 2y, 3.3% of budgetMARYLAND PHILANTHROPY NETWORK — $65,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetHILL DISTRICT CONSENSUS GROUP — $63,240 over 1y, 6.1% of budgetHARRY CHAPIN FOUNDATION — $60,570 over 6y, 11% of budgetMOTHER HUBBARDS CUPBOARD INC — $60,000 over 2y, 6.7% of budgetCOOPERATION JACKSON OF MISSISSIPPI — $60,000 over 2y, 3.6% of budgetNational Black Food and Justice Alliance — $55,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetAGRARIAN LAND TRUST — $54,813 over 1y, 4.4% of budgetHUNGER FREE VERMONT INC — $54,092 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetGOOD JOURNEY DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION — $50,000 over 1y, 24% of budgetBlack Sustainability Inc — $50,000 over 2y, 10% of budgetACCESS OF WEST MICHIGAN — $50,000 over 1y, 4.7% of budgetHeru Urban Farming and Garden — $50,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetCumberland County Food Security Council — $50,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetCOMMUNITY RESPONSE — $50,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetURBAN CORE COLLECTIVE — $50,000 over 1y, 5.6% of budgetGROWING HOME INC — $50,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetLOCAL MATTERS — $50,000 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetOpen Buffalo Inc — $47,568 over 1y, 3.7% 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.

Rsf Social Finance IncAmalgamated Charitabl…ImpactassetsincGrassroots Internatio…Clif Family FoundationSolutions Project IncCommon Counsel Founda…WK Kellogg FoundationWindward FundMovement Strategy Cen…Social and Environmen…Resist Inc
Rsf Social Finance IncCA47.3× affinity24 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Rsf Social Finance Inc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Impactassetsinc · Grassroots International Inc · Clif Family Foundation · Solutions Project Inc · Common Counsel Foundation · WK Kellogg Foundation · Windward Fund · Movement Strategy Center · Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc · Resist Inc

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 Whyhunger 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 5%
  • Pinelands Preservation Alliance — 35% of income from government
  • Nipmuc Indian Development Corp — 24% of income from government
  • Hunger Free Vermont Inc — 24% of income from government
  • University of Miami — 5% of income from government
  • Fusion Partnership Inc — 3% of income from government
  • Resist Inc — 2% of income from government
  • Ourspace World Inc — 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
27report 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 103 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