· Public charity
Advanced Energy Institute
To raise awareness of the public benefits and opportunities of advanced energy.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Rocky Mountain Institute | $200,000 |
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 98% 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +175% since the first grant, against +80% for the ones you funded once.
5 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 1 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, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $200k 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
- AFALLIANCE FOR CLEAN ENERGY NEW YORK INC3× · 2017–2019 · $250k · revenue +175%
- AIACT Institute Inc3× · 2017–2019 · $95k · revenue +10%
- IFINSTITUTE FOR ENERGY INNOVATION4× · 2017–2022 · $83k · revenue +355%
Funded once
- IEInterwest Energy Alliancegraduatedone grant, 2018 · $50k · revenue +168%
- EIENERGY INNOVATION BUSINESS COUNCILgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $30k · revenue +56%
- NFNCSL FOUNDATION FOR STATE LEGISLATURESgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $23k · revenue +158%
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.
The NW Energy Coalition is an alliance of over 100 environmental, civic, and human service organizations, utilities, and businesses in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia, plus many individual members. The NW Energy…
The California Energy Alliance (CEA) unites representatives of a broad range of organizations concerned about energy and the build environment. As a member-based organization, CEA works to improve California's energy future and migration…
The Clean Energy Transition Institute (CETI) is an independent, nonpartisan research and analysis nonprofit whose mission is to accelerate an equitable clean energy transition in the Northwest.
Clean energy research and advocacy. Clean Energy Group promotes effective clean energy policies, develops low carbon technology innovation strategies and promotes new financial tools to strengthen the economy and stabilize climate change.
ACT leads the just, equitable and rapid transition to a clean energy future and diverse climate economy.
To transform public policy to enable rapid growth of advanced energy businesses.
Shape and drive bold policy solutions to achieve equitable carbon-neutral economies.
Researching policy ideas on climate and clean energy in India, engaging legislators and business leaders to discuss those ideas.
To convene the private sector, Congress, leading climate and environmental advocates, and other experts to facilitate more formal and regular connections between interested parties and stakeholders to secure the biggest climate and clean…
To promote the use of efficient and sustainable energy resources
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Clean Energy Economy Minnesota and the most unlike its peers is State Legislative Leaders Foundation Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
15 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.
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 ALLIANCE FOR CLEAN ENERGY NEW YORK INC ↗
- Who funds Rocky Mountain Institute ↗
- Who funds ACT Institute Inc ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR ENERGY INNOVATION ↗
- Who funds CLEAN ENERGY ECONOMY MINNESOTA ↗
- Who funds Interwest Energy Alliance ↗
- Who funds Clean Energy Project Inc ↗
- Who funds ENERGY INNOVATION BUSINESS COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds NCSL FOUNDATION FOR STATE LEGISLATURES ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL CAUCUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATORS ↗
- Who funds THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds STATE LEGISLATIVE LEADERS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REGULATORY UTILITY COMMISSIONERS ↗
- Who funds Conservative Energy Network ↗
- Who funds Colorado Cleantech Industry Association Inc ↗
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: The Energy Foundation · United States Energy Foundation · Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated
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 Advanced Energy Institute 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.