· Public charity
Zero Foodprint
ZERO FOODPRINT is mobilizing the food world around agricultural climate solutions.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 101 grants below total $1,588,067 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $2,238,393 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $650,326 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 $10k33 grants · $251k
- $10k–50k66 grants · $1.2M
- $50k–250k2 grants · $153k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NAPA FARMS LLC | $78,221 |
| SAN PASQUAL VALLEY SOILS | $74,587 |
| ZANKER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT LLC | $44,000 |
| E&M DENIZ DAIRY | $41,001 |
| TURBOSCAPE INC | $36,300 |
| FANTOZZI FARMS | $32,500 |
| ATHWAL INVESTMENTS LP | $29,074 |
| NOTTINGHAMSHIRE FARMS LLC | $28,208 |
| TAG VENTURES 6 LLC | $28,074 |
| BREADTREE FARMS LLC | $28,011 |
| CARMAN RANCH LLC | $27,891 |
| STEMPLE CREEK RANCH INC | $27,250 |
| SPNA LLC | $26,074 |
| TAG VENTURES 8 LLC | $26,074 |
| PANA FARMS LLC | $26,074 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 67% of your 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.
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.
28 repeat relationships — 19 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down; 81 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, 25% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.2M 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
- GRGREENWASTE RECOVERY LLC2× · 2023–2024 · $134k
- SPSAN PASQUAL VALLEY SOILS2× · 2023–2024 · $115k
- EDE&M DENIZ DAIRY2× · 2023–2024 · $61k
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2022 · $68k
- SFSECONDMUSE FOUNDATIONone grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue -80%
- EHELGORRIAGA HARVESTING INCone grant, 2023 · $38k
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.
Advancing sustainability in the western area of the united states through a series of programs and activities designed to promote better ranching practices. a strong focus is to provide ranchers with the information, tools, technical…
Ag Innovations facilitates collaboration among diverse groups to develop holistic solutions to California's most complex agricultural, natural resource and environmental challenges.
To provide equitably resource producers and other food organizations focused on food security opportunities programs and services aimed at effective stewardship of resilient food ecosystems and related charitable programs and services…
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
Sweet farm is the world's first nonprofit sanctuary to address the devastating impact that factory farming has on climate change from the perspective of animals, plants, and the planet. we must first understand how these pieces are…
Sustainable Conservation advances the collaborative stewardship of Californias land, air, and water for the benefit of nature and people. For over three decades, Sustainable Conservation has built coalitions of people with different…
The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.
Create and publish educational materials, conduct professional development, promote awareness, and sponsor research on the spectacular biological diversity of the State of CA.
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.
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.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The California Land Stewardship Institute and the most unlike its peers is Malibu Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
16 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. 16 of the 169 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.
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: Mad Agriculture · Resources Legacy Fund · Clif Family Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Zero Foodprint 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.
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.