Skip to content
Winrock International Institute for Agricultural Development at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Winrock International Institute for Agricultural Development

Winrock's mission is to empower the disadvantaged, increase economic opportunity and sustain natural resources.

$12M
Granted FY2024still arriving
32
Grants FY2024still arriving
19
States reached
$690k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Community Improvement$2.4MPhilanthropy$2.4MInternational$2.2MFood & Nutrition$1.7MHealth$1.6MEducation$1.2MScience & Tech$533kEnvironment$519kOther$0
02FY2024 · 32 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 32 grants below total $3,780,556, the rows itemized in this filing. The $12,367,543 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $8,586,987 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $17k
  • $10k–50k10 grants · $234k
  • $50k–250k15 grants · $1.6M
  • $250k+5 grants · $2.0M
$65,171
Median grant
19
States reached
$159M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
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
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:

Its 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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%COMPURECYCLING CENTER INC: $15k → 27%SNV USA: $101k → 8%AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS: $230k → 14%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

VT
WA
MT
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
PA
CT
CA
CO
MO
KY
VA
MD
DE
AZ
NM
AR
TN
NC
DC
HI
OK
LA
MS
GA
TX
FL

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.

East Asia and the Pacific$3.1M · 42% · 48 grants

Stated purpose: SUBGRANTS IMPLEMENTED BASED ON FUNDER REQUIREMENTS

South Asia$2.3M · 31% · 34 grants

Stated purpose: SUBGRANTS IMPLEMENTED BASED ON FUNDER REQUIREMENTS

Sub-Saharan Africa$696k · 10% · 18 grants

Stated purpose: SUBGRANTS IMPLEMENTED BASED ON FUNDER REQUIREMENTS

Central America and the Caribbean$684k · 9% · 9 grants

Stated purpose: SUBGRANTS IMPLEMENTED BASED ON FUNDER REQUIREMENTS

Russia and Neighboring States$295k · 4% · 21 grants

Stated purpose: SUBGRANTS IMPLEMENTED BASED ON FUNDER REQUIREMENTS

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$290k · 4% · 4 grants

Stated purpose: SUBGRANTS IMPLEMENTED BASED ON FUNDER REQUIREMENTS

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. 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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

54%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$8.6M · 37 repeat orgs$7.3M to everyone else

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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

37
95

Total granted

$8.6M
$5.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+2%
+4%

Still filing today

49%
35%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 47% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.9M went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EducationFood & NutritionInternationalEnvironmentHealthHuman ServicesOther
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

  • NY
    NEW YORK INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
    2× · 2022–2023 · $303k · revenue +3%
  • IA
    INTERTRIBAL AGRICULTURE COUNCIL
    2× · 2023–2024 · $154k · revenue +26%
  • CQ
    Coffee Quality Institute formerly Specialty Coffee Institute
    2× · 2020–2022 · $122k · revenue +71%

Funded once

  • PO
    PARTNERS OF THE AMERICAS INC
    one grant, 2022 · $606k · revenue -8%
  • LA
    LIGHTHOUSE ADVISORS LLC
    one grant, 2023 · $605k
  • SI
    SIMPORTER INC
    one grant, 2023 · $350k
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
International Center for Food Ontology Operability Data and Semantics

The International Center for Food Ontology Operability Data and Semantics IC-FOODS has a stated mission to create the foundations for global decentralized traceable transparent and trustworthy food systems. We develop shared language…

Food & Nutrition
2
Coalition On Agricultural Greenhouse Gases

The c-agg multi-stakeholder coalition builds sustainable agriculture and climate change mitigation capacity that accelerates change across organizations, sectors and regions.

—
3
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
4
Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc

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…

Community Improvement
5
Nuru International

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…

International
6
International Center for Research On Women

The international center for research for women (icrw) is a global research institute, with a mission to advance rights and opportunities for women, girls, and structurally excluded populations with actionable evidence and solutions.

International
7
International Center for Living Aquatic Resources Management Inc I

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.

—
8
Institute for Agriculture & Trade Policy

Iatp works locally and globally at the intersection of policy and practice to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.

Food & Nutrition
9
International Crops Research Institute

To reduce poverty, hunger, malnutrition and environmental degradation in the dryland tropics

International
10
Groundswell International Inc

Groundswell International strenghtens communities to build healthy farming and food systems from the ground up.

International
11
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
12
Rainforest Alliance Inc

RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Commonwealth Kitchen Inc; the most unlike its peers is Devworks International. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

60 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

5
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
9
Early backer (in before they grew)
58/60
Grantees still filing
32/60
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CARTWHEEL STARTUP STUDIO: $1,614,842 · OtherCARTWHEEL STARTUP STUDIOTETRA TECH ARD: $993,503 · OtherTETRA TECH ARDVIAMO PBC: $749,594 · OtherVIAMO PBCLIGHTHOUSE ADVISORS LLC: $605,250 · OtherBLUE RASTER LLC: $473,034 · Other+107 more: $7,510,966 · Other+107 morePARTNERS OF THE AMERICAS INC: $605,859 · InternationalPARTNERS OF …OPPORTUNITY INTERNATIONAL INC D/B/A OPPORTUNITY INTERNATIONAL-US: $432,931 · InternationalOPPORTUNITY …FREEDOM COLLABORATIVE INC: $251,281 · InternationalFREEDOM COLL…INTERNATIONAL CITYCOUNTY MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION: $142,720 · InternationalINTERNATIONA…INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE MISSION: $137,081 · InternationalINTERNATIONA…INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ENTERPRISES: $115,005 · InternationalINTERNATIONA…INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL CORPS: $105,249 · InternationalINTERNATIONA…+1 more: $28,367 · InternationalNEW YORK INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $302,908 · EducationTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $262,582 · EducationOZARKA TECHNICAL COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $97,963 · EducationJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $96,535 · EducationCONNECTED NATION INC: $76,003 · EducationTrustees of Tufts College: $50,000 · EducationSHORTER COLLEGE: $46,665 · Education+3 more: $38,300 · EducationNATURAL SOYBEAN AND GRAIN ALLIANCE INC: $443,764 · Food & NutritionAGRICENTER INTERNATIONAL INC: $52,500 · Food & NutritionDAIRY GRAZING ALLIANCE INC: $25,000 · Food & Nutrition+5 more: $58,591 · Food & NutritionAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $229,792 · Human ServicesDEVWORKS INTERNATIONAL: $100,671 · Human ServicesCompuRecycling Center Inc: $15,000 · Human Services+1 more: $10,000 · Human ServicesVALLEY STEWARDSHIP NETWORK INC: $181,221 · EnvironmentCENTER FOR CLIMATE STRATEGIES INC: $58,088 · EnvironmentLAND STEWARDSHIP PROJECT: $24,811 · EnvironmentSUSTAINABLE MOLOKAI: $10,000 · Environment+1 more: $5,021 · EnvironmentLAWYERS WITHOUT BORDERS INC: $258,131 · Crime & Legal
Other$11,947,189International$1,818,493Education$970,956Food & Nutrition$579,855Human Services$355,463Environment$279,141Crime & Legal$258,131

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 budgetPARTNERS OF THE AMERICAS INC: $605,859 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetNATURAL SOYBEAN AND GRAIN ALLIANCE INC: $443,764 over 4y, 57% of budgetOPPORTUNITY INTERNATIONAL INC D/B/A OPPORTUNITY INTERNATIONAL-US: $432,931 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetNEW YORK INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $302,908 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE ARKANSAS REGIONAL INNOVATION HUB INC: $289,432 over 2y, 23% of budgetTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $262,582 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLAWYERS WITHOUT BORDERS INC: $258,131 over 2y, 10% of budgetFREEDOM COLLABORATIVE INC: $251,281 over 2y, 85% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $229,792 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSTOCKHOLM ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE US INC: $206,585 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetVALLEY STEWARDSHIP NETWORK INC: $181,221 over 1y, 37% of budgetINTERTRIBAL AGRICULTURE COUNCIL: $154,400 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetINTERNATIONAL CITYCOUNTY MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION: $142,720 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetINTERNATIONAL JUSTICE MISSION: $137,081 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAlliance for Rural Impact: $127,296 over 1y, 78% of budgetCoffee Quality Institute formerly Specialty Coffee Institute: $122,280 over 2y, 3.5% of budgetINTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ENTERPRISES: $115,005 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCOMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS OF ARKANSAS: $105,354 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetINTERNATIONAL MEDICAL CORPS: $105,249 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetDEVWORKS INTERNATIONAL: $100,671 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetCARGILL FOUNDATION: $99,919 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetOZARKA TECHNICAL COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $97,963 over 1y, 44% of budgetJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $96,535 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetARCARE: $95,281 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWildlife Conservation Society: $79,484 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEAST ARKANSAS FAMILY HEALTH CENTER INC: $78,674 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetCONNECTED NATION INC: $76,003 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetSong Community Development Corporation: $66,295 over 2y, 7.2% of budgetCENTER FOR CLIMATE STRATEGIES INC: $58,088 over 2y, 9.7% of budgetDream of Wild Health: $57,482 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetAGRICENTER INTERNATIONAL INC: $52,500 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetTrustees of Tufts College: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSHORTER COLLEGE: $46,665 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetNORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF SCIENCES FOUNDATION INC: $28,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetDAIRY GRAZING ALLIANCE INC: $25,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetLAND STEWARDSHIP PROJECT: $24,811 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetA RED CIRCLE: $19,800 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetNE ARKANSAS COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH CENTER INC: $17,787 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLEE COUNTY COOPERATIVE CLINIC: $15,517 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSUSTAINABLE FARMING ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA: $15,166 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetCompuRecycling Center Inc: $15,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetLA SEMILLA FOOD CENTER: $13,446 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetTransplanting Traditions Community Farm: $10,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetSUSTAINABLE MOLOKAI: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCHANGE TODAY CHANGE TOMORROW: $10,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetDEPARTAMENTO DE LA COMIDA DE PUERTO RICO INC: $10,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetINTERACTION INSTITUTE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHE OKC FOOD HUB INCORPORATED: $10,000 over 1y, 2.4% 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.

Arkansas Community Fo…The Schmidt Family Fo…Family Health Interna…Cornell UniversityAmerican Heart Associ…The Trustees of Colum…Cooperative for Assis…Global CommunitiesWindward FundCommunity Foundation …Clif Family FoundationPatagoniaorg
Arkansas Community Foundation IncAR21.3× affinity12 shared granteesties to 8 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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 Winrock International Institute for Agricultural Development funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Winrock International Institute for Agricultural Development. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 13%
  • 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
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
15report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely 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 148 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Winrock International Institute for Agricultural Development’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