· Public charity
Bioindustrial Manufacturing and Design Ecosystem Inc
Biomade's mission is to enable domestic bioindustrial manufacturing at all scales, develop technologies to enhance u.s.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2021–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k2 grants · $14k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $170k
- $50k–250k23 grants · $2.6M
- $250k+24 grants · $40M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CLEANJOULE | $7,837,323 |
| AMYRIS INC | $6,967,535 |
| CAMBIUM BIOMATERIALS INC | $4,911,050 |
| MITRE CORPORATION | $3,073,701 |
| FARMED MATERIALS | $2,578,251 |
| GENOMATICA INC | $2,172,567 |
| GINKGO BIOWORKS INC | $1,409,637 |
| THE REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA UC DAVIS | $1,189,309 |
| THE REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY | $1,187,788 |
| INDUSTRIAL MICROBES | $941,911 |
| CAPRA BIOSCIENCES INC | $862,151 |
| IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY | $807,162 |
| LYGOS INC | $796,686 |
| ZERO ACRE FARMS | $733,208 |
| ORIGIN MATERIALS | $689,118 |
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 (FY21–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 71% 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 +19% since the first grant, against +18% for the ones you funded once.
36 repeat relationships — 19 still active in FY2024, 17 since wound down; 35 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, 48% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $22M 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
- TMTHE MITRE CORPORATION2× · 2023–2024 · $4.1M · revenue +4%
TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY2× · 2023–2024 · $686k · revenue +6%- UOUniversity of Georgia Research Foundation Inc3× · 2022–2024 · $361k · revenue +28%
Funded once
- CSCHARLES STARK DRAPER LABORATORY INCone grant, 2023 · $391k · revenue +24%
- FMFARMED MATERIALS INCone grant, 2022 · $250k
- MMICROBYREone grant, 2022 · $206k
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 mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
The mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…
Research, education and general - princeton university is a private not-for-profit, non-sectarian institution of higher learning with approximately 5,700 undergraduate and 3,300 graduate students. 2,500 students graduated in the 2024-2025…
Education and Research
The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.
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…
See Disclosure Above.
Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.
The mission of the university enterprise laboratories is to support early-stage ventures in life sciences to growth and commercial success through connections, services, and world-class laboratory facilities in minnesota's entrepreneurship…
The university of tulsa is a student-centered research university that cultivates interconnected learning experiences to explore complex ideas and create new knowledge in a spirit of free inquiry. guided by our commitment to diversity,…
Augusta university research institute, inc. (the "institute") was incorporated under the laws of the state of georgia as a nonprofit corporation on july 31, 1980. the institute qualified as a tax-exempt corporation under section 501(c)(3)…
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.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Worcester Polytechnic Institute and the most unlike its peers is Utah Stem 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.
Your grantees are a median of 56 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
14 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. 14 of the 86 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 THE MITRE CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds EAST TENNESSEE STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CHARLES STARK DRAPER LABORATORY INC ↗
- Who funds University of Georgia Research Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds BIOBUILDER EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE ↗
- Who funds UTAH STEM FOUNDATION 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: Northeastern University · University of Delaware · National Collegiate Inventors & Innovators Alliance Inc · Carnegie Mellon University · Johns Hopkins University · Folds of Honor Foundation · Tulsa Community Foundation · Columbus Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Bioindustrial Manufacturing and Design Ecosystem 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Charles Stark Draper Laboratory Inc — 100% of income from government
- University of Delaware — 30% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston University — 12% of income from government
- Johns Hopkins University — 12% of income from government
- Worcester Polytechnic Institute — 8% 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Bioindustrial Manufacturing and Design Ecosystem Inc?
Find your warmest path to Bioindustrial Manufacturing and Design Ecosystem Inc 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.