· Public charity
Associated General Contractors of America Inc
The associated general contractors of america, the voice of the construction industry, is an organization of qualified construction contractors and industry related companies dedicated to skill, integrity, and responsibility.
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.
The 3 grants below total $125,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $129,792 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $4,792 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
- $10k–50k2 grants · $45k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $80k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| THE ROAD INFORMATION PROGRAM | $80,000 |
| NATL CTR FOR CONSTRUCTION EDU & RES | $25,000 |
| NATIONAL BUILDING MUSEUM | $20,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–18, $101k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 +13% since the first grant, against +12% for the ones you funded once.
9 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- UCUS Chamber of Commerce Foundation4× · 2018–2021 · $275k · revenue +56%
- ARAMERICAN ROAD AND TRANSPORTATION BUILDERS ASSOCIATION5× · 2018–2022 · $200k · revenue +28%
- TNTHE NATIONAL CENTER FOR CONSTRUCTION EDU AND RESEARCH LTD7× · 2018–2024 · $175k · revenue +155%
Funded once
- ACAGC Construction Advocacy Fundone grant, 2017 · $848k · 49% of their budget
- CFCalifornians for Safe Reliable Infrastructureone grant, 2018 · $250k · revenue -96%
- WMWilliam Marsh Rice Universitygraduatedone grant, 2021 · $100k · revenue +28%
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.
To provide essential value to our members, their careers, our partners, and the public, asce will: facilitate the advancement of technology; encourage and provide the tools for lifelong learning; promote professionalism and the profession;…
The business association and voice of america's engineering industry, representing thousands of independent u.s. engineering companies engaged in the development of transportation, water, and other public and commercial facilities.
Trade association
American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…
Cifac is a non-profit 501(c)(6) membership organization that supports the coalition of concerned construction industry associations, contractors and labor unions that work to ensure state and local governments' compliance with the public…
To assist member firms in achieving higher professional, ethical business and economic standards, enabling member firms to provide quality consulting and engineering services for their clients and the public.
To promote the health and sustainability of minnesota's construction industry through professional leadership and advocacy, with an enduring commitment to serve all members with skill, responsibility, and integrity.
The AIA California, in collaboration with local components, is the voice of the architectural profession.
Founded in 1889, the national association of regulatory utility commisioners (naruc) is a non-profit organization dedicated to representing the state public service commisions who regulate the utilities that provide essential services such…
The mission of ACCE is to be a leading advocate of quality construction programs and to promote, support, and accredit quality construction education programs in colleges and universities.
Advancement of Civil Engineering Profession
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Agc Education and Research Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is William Marsh Rice University. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
18 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. 18 of the 19 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.
- Who funds AGC Construction Advocacy Fund ↗
- Who funds THE ROAD INFORMATION PROGRAM INC ↗
- Who funds US Chamber of Commerce Foundation ↗
- Who funds Californians for Safe Reliable Infrastructure ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN ROAD AND TRANSPORTATION BUILDERS ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR CONSTRUCTION EDU AND RESEARCH LTD ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL BUILDING MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds AGC CHARITIES INC ↗
- Who funds William Marsh Rice University ↗
- Who funds CONSTRUCTION EDUCATION FOUNDATION OF COLORADO ↗
- Who funds ACE MENTOR PROGRAM OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds AGC EDUCATION AND RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE MOUNT VERNON LADIES' ASSOCIATION OF THE UNION ↗
- Who funds CARPENTERS' COMPANY OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CLEAN WATER AGENCIES ↗
- Who funds COMMON GROUND ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds EDISON ELECTRIC INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds CONSTRUCTION USERS ROUNDTABLE ↗
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: AGC Construction Advocacy Fund · 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 Associated General Contractors of America Inc 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.
- The National Center for Construction Edu and Research Ltd — 0% of income from government
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.