Skip to content
American Cement Association Education Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

American Cement Association Education Foundation

Meeting the educational needs of the cement industry.

$534k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$500k
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 2025.

Science & Tech$1.5MEducation$1.3MCommunity Improvement$32k
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $500,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $533,670 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $33,670 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.
$500,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CONCRETE ADVANCEMENT FOUNDATION$500,000
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 49% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 12%TEMPLE UNIVERSITY: $35k → 22%CHARLES PANKOW FOUNDATION: $35k → 14%TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY: $35k → 22%UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI: $35k → 15%IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $70k → 17%AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE: $20k → 8%UWM FOUNDATION INC: $300k → 17%BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY: $35k → 8%UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY: $35k → 12%CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGY LABRATORIES INC: $76k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS FOUNDATION: $140k → 19%CONCRETE ADVANCEMENT FOUNDATION: $500k → 9%RMC RESEARCH AND EDUCATION FUND: $25k → 8%IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $35k → 17%UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE FOUNDATION: $100k → 17%UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY: $35k → 12%PORTLAND CEMENT ASSOCIATION: $20k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS FOUNDATION: $35k → 19%CONCRETE ADVANCEMENT FOUNDATION: $250k → 9%UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE FOUNDATION: $25k → 17%CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGY LABRATORIES INC: $18k → 14%CONCRETE ADVANCEMENT FOUNDATION: $250k → 9%PORTLAND CEMENT ASSOCIATION: $12k → 14%CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGY LABRATORIES INC: $11k → 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
IL
WI
MI
MA
IA
PA
CA
UT
CO
NE
VA
MD
SC
TX
FL
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.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.9M · 7 repeat orgs$370k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
11

Total granted

$1.9M
$370k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+1%
+31%

Still filing today

71%
55%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
EducationScience & TechPhilanthropyOther
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

  • THE UWM FOUNDATION INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $425k · revenue +35%
  • University of Illinois Foundation
    2× · 2019–2020 · $175k · revenue +39%
  • IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION
    2× · 2017–2018 · $105k · revenue +1%

Funded once

  • CP
    CHARLES PANKOW FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $35k · revenue -1%
  • UO
    UNIV OF TEXAS AT ARLINGTON
    one grant, 2024 · $35k
  • TU
    Temple University - Of The Commonwealth System of Higher Education
    one grant, 2023 · $35k · revenue +16%
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
Case Western Reserve University

Case Western Reserve University is an independent, research-oriented university with broadly based strengths in health, including medicine, nursing and dentistry; in engineering; in the arts and sciences; and in law, management and social…

Education
2
University Foundation
—
3
California Lutheran University

The mission of the university is to educate leaders for a global society who are strong in character and judgment, confident in their identity and vocation, and committed to service and justice.

Education
4
Illinois Institute of Technology

To provide distinctive and relevant education in an environment of scientific, technological, and professional knowledge creation and innovation.

Education
5
Trustees of Clark University

Clark university's mission is to educate undergraduate and graduate students to be imaginative and contributing citizens of the world, and to advance the frontiers of knowledge and understanding through rigorous scholarship and creative…

Education
6
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research

See schedule ouniversity corporation for atmospheric research (ucar), on behalf of, and in cooperation with its member university members, is engaged in the management of long-term atmospheric and related research and educational…

Science & Tech
7
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
8
Cornell University

Education, research, medical services and other public services.

Education
9
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
10
Miami University Foundation

Support of miami university

Education
11
American Association of State Colleges and Universities

Aascu is a washington, d.c. based higher education association that represents the sector of over 500 regional public colleges, universities, and systems whose members share a learning and teaching centered culture, a commitment to…

Education
12
Collegiate Foundations
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Clemson University Foundation; 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

12 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. 12 of the 19 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
9/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Massachusetts Institute of Technology: $500,000 · EducationMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyTHE UWM FOUNDATION INC: $424,846 · EducationTHE UWM FOUNDATION INCUniversity of Illinois Foundation: $175,000 · EducationUniversity of Illinois FoundationIOWA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $105,000 · EducationIOWA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION+4 more: $140,000 · Education+4 moreCONCRETE ADVANCEMENT FOUNDATION INC: $1,025,000 · Science & TechCONCRETE ADVANCEMENT FOUNDATION INC+1 more: $20,000 · Science & TechCONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGY LABRATORIES INC: $104,500 · OtherCONSTRUCTION TE…UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY: $70,000 · OtherUTAH STATE UNIV…UNIV OF TEXAS AT ARLINGTON: $35,000 · OtherUNIV OF TEXAS A…BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY: $35,000 · OtherBRIGHAM YOUNG U…UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA: $35,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF N…WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY: $35,000 · OtherWASHINGTON STAT…TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY: $35,000 · OtherTEXAS A&M UNIVE…AMERICAN CEMENT ASSOCIATION: $32,000 · OtherAMERICAN CEMENT…CHARLES PANKOW FOUNDATION: $35,000 · Philanthropy
Education$1,344,846Science & Tech$1,045,000Other$381,500Philanthropy$35,000

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 budgetCONCRETE ADVANCEMENT FOUNDATION INC: $1,025,000 over 4y, 9.8% of budgetMassachusetts Institute of Technology: $500,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE UWM FOUNDATION INC: $424,846 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetUniversity of Illinois Foundation: $175,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetIOWA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $105,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCHARLES PANKOW FOUNDATION: $35,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetTemple University - Of The Commonwealth System of Higher Education: $35,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Miami: $35,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $35,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCLEMSON UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $35,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN CEMENT ASSOCIATION: $32,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization American Cement Association Education Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from American Cement Association Education Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 35%
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology: 35% of income from government
  • University of Miami: 5% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
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 19 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 American Cement Association Education’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