Skip to content

· Public charity

Aci Foundation

To receive, adminster, and expend funds for educational, research, scientific, and charitable purposes.

$1.2M
Granted FY2025still arriving
24
Grants FY2025still arriving
13
States reached
$89k
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$2.6MEducation$472kHealth$142kRecreation & Sports$53kHousing & Shelter$7k
02FY2025 · 24 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 24 grants below total $680,056, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,182,891 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $502,835 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 · FY2025

  • $10k–50k22 grants · $526k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $154k
$25,500
Median grant
13
States reached
$6.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN$89,000
CHARLES PANKOW FOUNDATION$65,000
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS - AUSTIN$43,125
TEXAS A&M ENGINEERING EXPERIMENT STATION$43,125
KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY$43,125
AUBURN UNIVERSITY$43,125
TEMPLE UNIVERSITY$43,125
COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY$28,865
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS$28,750
NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY$28,750
WISS JANNEY ELSTNER ASSOCIATES INC$26,450
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON$25,500
NATIONAL READY MIXED CONCRETE ASSOCIATION$25,000
AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE$20,000
PURDUE UNIVERSITY$14,375
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 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 54% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 11%PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY: $50k → 16%TEMPLE UNIVERSITY: $43k → 22%REGENTS OF UNIV OF CALIFORNIA: $50k → 10%REGENTS UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA: $38k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS: $29k → 16%CPI FOUNDATION: $28k → 18%UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS - AUSTIN: $43k → 10%TEXAS A&M ENGINEERING EXPERIMENT STATION: $43k → 22%UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS OF FAYETTEVILLE: $36k → 14%REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $89k → 14%AUBURN UNIVERSITY: $43k → 15%KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY: $43k → 20%UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-KANSAS CITY: $48k → 15%MISSOURI S&T: $35k → 16%UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN - MADISON: $71k → 10%NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY: $29k → 8%UTAH VALLEY UNIVERSITY: $38k → 8%GEORGIA TECH FOUNDATION: $26k → 13%UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME: $33k → 13%OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $38k → 15%CASE WESTERN UNIVERSITY: $31k → 17%UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON: $38k → 9%CHARLES PANKOW FOUNDATION: $150k → 9%NEW JERSEY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $35k → 16%VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE: $46k → 21%BOARD OF REGENTS NEVADA SYSTEM OF HIGHER EDUCATION: $47k → 10%TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY: $62k → 10%TEXAS A&M ENGINEERING EXPERIMENT STATION: $43k → 22%REGENT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $29k → 14%AUBURN UNIVERSITY: $35k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-KANSAS CITY: $38k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME: $31k → 13%OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $27k → 15%CHARLES PANKOW FOUNDATION: $150k → 9%UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA: $38k → 10%TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY: $27k → 10%TEXAS A&M ENGINEERING EXPERIMENT STATION: $38k → 22%CHARLES PANKOW FOUNDATION: $126k → 9%ILLINOIS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $26k → 14%MISSOURI UNIV OF SCIENCE AND TECH: $50k → 16%CHARLES PANKOW FOUNDATION: $100k → 9%CHARLES PANKOW FOUNDATION: $65k → 9%CHARLES PANKOW FOUNDATION: $50k → 9%WISS JANNEY ELSTNER ASSOCIATES: $66k → 14%CHARLES PANKOW FOUNDATION: $50k → 9%WISS JANNEY ELSTNER ASSOCIATES INC: $26k → 14%CHARLES PANKOW FOUNDATION: $50k → 9%NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY: $38k → 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

WA
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
NV
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CA
UT
CO
NE
MO
VA
MD
KS
AR
NC
AL
GA
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region: $129k on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 3 regions, $72k to organizations and $57k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

North America (Canada and Mexico)$77k · 60% · 1 grant · 12 people

Stated purpose: RESEARCH · SCHOLARSHIP/FELLOWSHIP · TRAVEL EXPENSES

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$43k · 34% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: RESEARCH

Middle East and North Africa$8k · 6% · 2 people

Stated purpose: SCHOLARSHIP · TRAVEL EXPENSES

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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.6M · 40 repeat orgs$227k to everyone else

40 repeat relationships: 22 still active in FY2025, 18 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

40
9

Total granted

$3.6M
$215k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+14%
+116%

Still filing today

25%
22%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $12k 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
EducationPhilanthropyScience & TechRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • TU
    Temple University - Of The Commonwealth System of Higher Education
    4× · 2020–2025 · $101k · revenue +14%
  • AC
    AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE
    4× · 2022–2025 · $80k · revenue +11%
  • TR
    The Research Foundation for The State University of New York
    2× · 2023–2024 · $59k · revenue +33%

Funded once

  • PS
    PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2017 · $50k
  • RU
    REGENTS UNIV OF CALIFORNIA
    one grant, 2020 · $38k
  • CF
    CPI FOUNDATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $28k · revenue +71%
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
William Marsh Rice University

As a leading research university with a distinctive commitment to undergraduate education, Rice University aspires to path breaking research, unsurpassed teaching, and contributions to the betterment of our world. It seeks to fulfill this…

Education
2
The Catholic University of America

As the national university of the catholic church in the united states, founded and sponsored by the bishops of the country with the approval of the holy see, the catholic university of america is committed to being a comprehensive…

Education
3
Marquette University

As a Catholic, Jesuit university our mission is to search for truth, discover shareknowledge, foster personal professional excellence, promote a life of faith and developleadership expressed in service to others. See Schedule O.

Education
4
Drexel University

Drexel university fulfills its founder's vision of preparing each new generation of students for productive professional and civic lives while also focusing its collective expertise on solving society's greatest problems. drexel is an…

Education
5
The Central European University

Ceu is committed to promoting the values of open society and self-reflective critical thinking. it aims at excellence in the mastery of established knowledge, courage to pursue the creation of new knowledge in the humanities, the social…

International
6
Wake Forest University

Wake Forest University, a 501(c)(3) institution of higher education, is dedicated to the pursuit of excellence in the liberal arts and in graduate and professional education. The organization is comprised of seven constituent parts: Wake…

Education
7
Nova Southeastern University Inc

The mission of Nova Southeastern University-a selective, doctoral research university-is to deliver academic programs in a dynamic, innovative environment. We foster academic excellence, leadership, integrity (continued on Schedule O) and…

Education
8
Western New England University

Western new england university, a comprehensive private institution with a tradition of excellence in teaching and scholarship and a commitment to service, awards undergraduate, master's, and doctoral degrees in various departments from…

Education
9
Institute for Advanced Study - Louis Bamberger & Mrs Felix Fuld Foundation

The institute for advanced study (the institute) is one of the world's leading centers for theoretical research and intellectual inquiry. see schedule o.

Science & Tech
10
Trustees of Dartmouth College

Dartmouth College educates the most promising students and prepares them for a lifetime of learning and of responsible leadership, through a faculty dedicated to teaching and the creation of knowledge.

Education
11
Chancellor Masters & Scholars of the University of Oxford

The principal objects of the University are the advancement of learning by teaching and research, and its dissemination by every means. We work as one Oxford bringing together our staff, students and alumni, our colleges, faculties,…

—
12
Albany College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences

We educate the next generation of leaders to improve the health of our society.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northwestern University; the most unlike its peers is Charles Pankow Foundation. 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

14 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. 14 of the 51 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/14
Grantees still filing
11/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CURATORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI: $151,000 · OtherCURATORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURIWISS JANNEY ELSTNER ASSOCIATES: $142,000 · OtherWISS JANNEY ELSTNER ASSOCIATESTEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY: $138,125 · OtherTEXAS A&M UNIVERSITYREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $132,125 · OtherUniversity of Wisconsin Madison: $122,000 · OtherTEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY: $114,999 · OtherOHIO STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $112,487 · OtherUNIV OF TEXAS AT ARLINGTON: $103,000 · OtherBOARD OF REGENTS NEVADA SYSTEM OF HIGHER EDUCATION: $102,105 · OtherAUBURN UNIVERSITY: $94,258 · Other+29 more: $1,344,342 · Other+29 moreCHARLES PANKOW FOUNDATION: $741,250 · PhilanthropyCHARLES PANKOW FOUNDA…University of Notre Dame du Lac: $114,225 · EducationUniversity of …Temple University - Of The Commonwealth System of Higher Education: $100,625 · EducationTemple Univers…The Research Foundation for The State University of New York: $58,612 · EducationThe Research F…JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $57,300 · EducationJOHNS HOPKINS …Illinois Institute of Technology: $56,451 · EducationIllinois Insti…CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY: $55,301 · EducationCASE WESTERN R…CPI FOUNDATION INC: $28,123 · EducationCPI FOUNDATION…GEORGIA TECH FOUNDATION INC: $26,041 · Education+1 more: $13,688 · EducationAMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE: $80,000 · Science & TechNorthwestern University: $52,500 · Recreation & Sports
Other$2,556,441Philanthropy$741,250Education$510,366Science & Tech$80,000Recreation & Sports$52,500

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 budgetCHARLES PANKOW FOUNDATION: $741,250 over 8y, 11% of budgetUniversity of Notre Dame du Lac: $114,225 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetTemple University - Of The Commonwealth System of Higher Education: $100,625 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE: $80,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetThe Research Foundation for The State University of New York: $58,612 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $57,300 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetIllinois Institute of Technology: $56,451 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY: $55,301 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNorthwestern University: $52,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL READY MIXED CONCRETE ASSOCIATION: $50,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetCPI FOUNDATION INC: $28,123 over 1y, 3.9% of budgetGEORGIA TECH FOUNDATION INC: $26,041 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Miami: $13,688 over 2y, 0.0% 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 CHARLES PANKOW FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds University of Notre Dame du Lac ↗
  • Who funds OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Temple University - Of The Commonwealth System of Higher Education ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds The Research Foundation for The State University of New York ↗
  • Who funds JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds Illinois Institute of Technology ↗
  • Who funds CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds Northwestern University ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL READY MIXED CONCRETE ASSOCIATION ↗

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.

American Chemical SocietyDC13.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Chemical Society · Folds of Honor Foundation · Johns Hopkins 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 Aci Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Aci Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 12%
  • Johns Hopkins University: 12% of income from government
  • University of Miami: 5% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Aci Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Aci Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

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 51 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 Aci’s filings →

More from the funding graph