· Public charity
Winrock International Institute for Agricultural Development
Winrock's mission is to empower the disadvantaged, increase economic opportunity and sustain natural resources.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 70% of WINROCK INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 32 grants below total $3,780,556 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $12,367,543 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $8,586,987 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
- Under $10k2 grants · $17k
- $10k–50k10 grants · $234k
- $50k–250k15 grants · $1.6M
- $250k+5 grants · $2.0M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| TETRA TECH ARD | $689,637 |
| BLUE RASTER LLC | $473,034 |
| WORLD VISION INC | $282,790 |
| TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA | $262,582 |
| BOARD OF TRUSTEES MICHIGAN LABORERS' PENSION FUND | $253,367 |
| ARVA INTELLIGENCE CORP | $220,246 |
| NATURAL SOYBEAN AND GRAIN ALLIANCE INC | $157,690 |
| FREEDOM COLLABORATIVE INC | $151,781 |
| INTERTRIBAL AGRICULTURE COUNCIL INC | $147,400 |
| INTERNATIONAL CITY COUNTY | $142,720 |
| INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE MISSION | $137,081 |
| RICELAND FOODS INC | $104,231 |
| MILESTON COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION | $73,671 |
| EAST ARKANSAS FAMILY HEAL | $69,056 |
| WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY | $66,802 |
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 (FY18–24, $345k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 71% 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
Grants abroad, by region — $7.3M on the FY2024 return
Schedule F, as filed: 6 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: SUBGRANTS IMPLEMENTED BASED ON FUNDER REQUIREMENTS
Stated purpose: SUBGRANTS IMPLEMENTED BASED ON FUNDER REQUIREMENTS
Stated purpose: SUBGRANTS IMPLEMENTED BASED ON FUNDER REQUIREMENTS
Stated purpose: SUBGRANTS IMPLEMENTED BASED ON FUNDER REQUIREMENTS
Stated purpose: SUBGRANTS IMPLEMENTED BASED ON FUNDER REQUIREMENTS
Stated purpose: SUBGRANTS IMPLEMENTED BASED ON FUNDER REQUIREMENTS
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.
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.
37 repeat relationships — 16 still active in FY2024, 21 since wound down; 15 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, 47% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.9M 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
- NYNEW YORK INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY2× · 2022–2023 · $303k · revenue +3%
- IAINTERTRIBAL AGRICULTURE COUNCIL2× · 2023–2024 · $154k · revenue +26%
- CQCoffee Quality Institute formerly Specialty Coffee Institute2× · 2020–2022 · $122k · revenue +71%
Funded once
- POPARTNERS OF THE AMERICAS INCone grant, 2022 · $606k · revenue -8%
- LALIGHTHOUSE ADVISORS LLCone grant, 2023 · $605k
- SISIMPORTER INCone grant, 2023 · $350k
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.
Improve the food value chain in developing countries by mobilizing corporate volunteers to share knowledge and expertise with small and growing food processors.
Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…
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.
Nuru is a global collective that enables inclusive and sustainable prosperity by identifying communities at the stability tipping point, strengthening rural livelihoods and market systems, and fostering stabilizing connections that repair…
To end hunger and advance sustainable development by 2030 through science and innovation to transform food, land and water systems with aquatic foods for healthier people and planet.
To reduce poverty, hunger, malnutrition and environmental degradation in the dryland tropics
The c-agg multi-stakeholder coalition builds sustainable agriculture and climate change mitigation capacity that accelerates change across organizations, sectors and regions.
The roa intends to create a path for agricultural producers of food and fiber to introduce and scale the use of regenerative organic practices in their operation in an effort to increase soil health and carbon through soil. also the roa…
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.
Isf advisors is the leading strategic and financial advisory group committed to mobilizing capital for a more sustainable, equitable, and productive global food system.
Iatp works locally and globally at the intersection of policy and practice to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.
World coffee research unites the global coffee industry to drive science-based agricultural solutions to urgently secure a diverse and sustainable supply of quality coffee today and for generations to come. our mission is to grow, protect,…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Commonwealth Kitchen Inc and the most unlike its peers is Cargill 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 31 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) — 7% of your grantees by number, and just 7% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.7% 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.
60 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. 60 of the 148 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 PARTNERS OF THE AMERICAS INC ↗
- Who funds NATURAL SOYBEAN AND GRAIN ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds OPPORTUNITY INTERNATIONAL INC D/B/A OPPORTUNITY INTERNATIONAL-US ↗
- Who funds NEW YORK INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ↗
- Who funds THE ARKANSAS REGIONAL INNOVATION HUB INC ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA ↗
- Who funds LAWYERS WITHOUT BORDERS INC ↗
- Who funds FREEDOM COLLABORATIVE INC ↗
- Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
- Who funds STOCKHOLM ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE US INC ↗
- Who funds VALLEY STEWARDSHIP NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds INTERTRIBAL AGRICULTURE COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL CITYCOUNTY MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE MISSION ↗
- Who funds Alliance for Rural Impact ↗
- Who funds Coffee Quality Institute formerly Specialty Coffee Institute ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ENTERPRISES ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS OF ARKANSAS ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL CORPS ↗
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: Arkansas Community Foundation Inc · The Schmidt Family Foundation · Family Health International Inc · Cornell University · American Heart Association Inc · The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York · Cooperative for Assistance and Relief Everywhere Inc · Global Communities · Windward Fund · Community Foundation for San Benito County · Clif Family Foundation · Patagoniaorg
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 Winrock International Institute for Agricultural Development 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.
- Lawyers Without Borders Inc — 69% of income from government
- Trustees of Tufts College — 13% of income from government
- Johns Hopkins University — 12% of income from government
- Commonwealth Kitchen Inc — 9% 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.