Skip to content
Advanced Energy Institute at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Advanced Energy Institute

To raise awareness of the public benefits and opportunities of advanced energy.

$200k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$200k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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.

Environment$853kPublic Benefit$33k
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$200,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$17M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Rocky Mountain Institute$200,000
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 98% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%State Legislative Leaders Foundation Inc: $10k → 8%NECEC INSTITUTE: $50k → 16%CLEAN ENERGY ECONOMY MINNESOTA: $40k → 11%KEEA ENERGY EFFICIENCY ALLIANCE: $10k → 11%ALLIANCE FOR CLEAN ENERGY NEW YORK: $125k → 14%National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners: $6k → 14%Michigan Energy Innovation Business Council: $30k → 16%COLORADO CLEANTECH INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION: $5k → 7%Rocky Mountain Institute: $200k → 12%National Conference of State Legislatures: $23k → 12%CLEAN ENERGY PROJECT: $30k → 13%NECEC INSTITUTE: $35k → 16%Clean Energy Economy Minnesota: $30k → 11%ALLIANCE FOR CLEAN ENERGY NEW YORK: $75k → 14%NATIONAL CAUCUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATORS: $10k → 14%Institute for Energy Innovation: $25k → 16%CLEAN ENERGY PROJECT: $10k → 13%NECEC: $10k → 16%ALLIANCE FOR CLEAN ENERGY NEW YORK: $50k → 14%INSTITUTE FOR ENERGY INNOVATION: $7k → 16%INSTITUTE FOR ENERGY INNOVATION: $41k → 14%CONSERVATIVE ENERGY NETWORK: $5k → 16%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

MN
MI
NY
MA
NV
PA
CO
NM
DC
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

61%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$538k · 5 repeat orgs$348k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +175% since the first grant, against +80% for those 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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
9

Total granted

$538k
$148k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+175%
+80%

Still filing today

80%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $200k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’24
EnvironmentCommunity ImprovementEducationPublic BenefitHealthOther
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

  • AF
    ALLIANCE FOR CLEAN ENERGY NEW YORK INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $250k · revenue +175%
  • AI
    ACT Institute Inc
    3× · 2017–2019 · $95k · revenue +10%
  • IF
    INSTITUTE FOR ENERGY INNOVATION
    4× · 2017–2022 · $83k · revenue +355%

Funded once

  • IE
    Interwest Energy Alliancegraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $50k · revenue +168%
  • EI
    ENERGY INNOVATION BUSINESS COUNCILgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $30k · revenue +56%
  • NF
    NCSL FOUNDATION FOR STATE LEGISLATURESgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $23k · revenue +158%
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
Nw Energy Coalition

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…

—
2
Advocates for Climate Innovation
Philanthropy
3
California Energy Alliance

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…

Public Safety & Disaster
4
Clean Energy Transition Institute

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.

Education
5
Clean Energy Group Inc

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.

Environment
6
Alliance for Climate Transition Inc

ACT leads the just, equitable and rapid transition to a clean energy future and diverse climate economy.

Community Improvement
7
Advanced Energy United Inc

To transform public policy to enable rapid growth of advanced energy businesses.

Community Improvement
8
Fresh Energy

Shape and drive bold policy solutions to achieve equitable carbon-neutral economies.

Environment
9
Climate Parliament Inc

Researching policy ideas on climate and clean energy in India, engaging legislators and business leaders to discuss those ideas.

International
10
Texas Clean Energy Coalition
—
11
Seec Institute Inc

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…

Education
12
International Institute for Energy Conservation

To promote the use of efficient and sustainable energy resources

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Clean Energy Economy Minnesota; 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.
04the grantee network

15 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.

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

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/15
Grantees still filing
12/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ALLIANCE FOR CLEAN ENERGY NEW YORK INC: $250,000 · EnvironmentALLIANCE FOR CLEAN ENERGY NEW YORK INCACT Institute Inc: $95,000 · EnvironmentACT Institute IncINSTITUTE FOR ENERGY INNOVATION: $82,500 · EnvironmentINSTITUTE FOR ENERGY INNOVATIONCLEAN ENERGY ECONOMY MINNESOTA: $70,384 · EnvironmentCLEAN ENERGY ECONOMY MINNESOTA+2 more: $15,000 · EnvironmentRocky Mountain Institute: $200,000 · OtherRocky Mountain InstituteClean Energy Project Inc: $40,000 · OtherClean Energy Project IncENERGY INNOVATION BUSINESS COUNCIL: $30,000 · OtherENERGY INNOVATION BUSINESS COUNCIL+1 more: $5,500 · OtherInterwest Energy Alliance: $50,000 · Community ImprovementColorado Cleantech Industry Association Inc: $5,000 · Community ImprovementNCSL FOUNDATION FOR STATE LEGISLATURES: $22,500 · Public BenefitSTATE LEGISLATIVE LEADERS FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 · HealthNATIONAL CAUCUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATORS: $10,000 · Education
Environment$512,884Other$275,500Community Improvement$55,000Public Benefit$22,500Health$10,000Education$10,000

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 budgetALLIANCE FOR CLEAN ENERGY NEW YORK INC: $250,000 over 3y, 10% of budgetRocky Mountain Institute: $200,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetACT Institute Inc: $95,000 over 3y, 3.3% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR ENERGY INNOVATION: $82,500 over 4y, 13% of budgetCLEAN ENERGY ECONOMY MINNESOTA: $70,384 over 2y, 12% of budgetInterwest Energy Alliance: $50,000 over 1y, 6.1% of budgetClean Energy Project Inc: $40,000 over 2y, 5.9% of budgetENERGY INNOVATION BUSINESS COUNCIL: $30,000 over 1y, 5.3% of budgetNCSL FOUNDATION FOR STATE LEGISLATURES: $22,500 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetSTATE LEGISLATIVE LEADERS FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetNATIONAL CAUCUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATORS: $10,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REGULATORY UTILITY COMMISSIONERS: $5,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetConservative Energy Network: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetColorado Cleantech Industry Association Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.7% 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.

The Energy FoundationUnited States Energy …Environmental Defense…
The Energy FoundationCA17.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Energy Foundation · United States Energy Foundation · Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated

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 Advanced Energy Institute funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Advanced Energy Institute. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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 15 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 Advanced Energy Institute’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