Skip to content
Cec Artslink Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Cec Artslink Inc

Cec artslink promotes international communication and understanding through collaborative, innovative arts projects for mutual benefit.

$107k
Granted FY2024still arriving
5
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$7k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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.

Arts & Culture$233kInternational$16kEducation$6k
02FY2024 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 5 grants below total $29,775, the rows itemized in this filing. The $107,121 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $77,346 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.
$5,525
Median grant
5
States reached
$300k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MAGNUM FOUNDATION$6,750
KALA ART INSTITUTE$6,650
THE LUMINARY$5,525
HYDE PARK ART CENTER$5,450
SECOND SHIFT STUDIO SPACE$5,400
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 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 65% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%FINE ARTS WORK CENTER: $7k → 8%SECOND SHIFT STUDIO SPACE: $5k → 14%KALA ART INSTITUTE: $7k → 10%ZERO1: $7k → 10%LAXART: $7k → 14%THE NEW SCHOOL: $6k → 17%FOUND SOUND NATION: $6k → 20%UNLISTED PROJECTS: $11k → 10%LAUMEIER SCULPTURE PARK: $7k → 11%THE LUMINARY: $6k → 21%PORTLAND INSTITUTE OF CONTEMPORARY ART: $11k → 12%KALA ART INSTITUTE: $7k → 9%WESTERN STATES ART FEDERATION: $6k → 12%CLEVELAND PUBLIC THEATER: $7k → 17%HYDE PARK ART CENTER: $9k → 14%CONTEMPORARY ARTS CENTER OF NEW ORLEANS: $7k → 23%THE DANCE EXCHANGE INC: $10k → 8%KALA ART INSTITUTE: $7k → 10%LOS ANGELES POVERTY DEPARTMENT: $6k → 14%MAGNUM FOUNDATION: $7k → 17%ID ART CENTER INC: $10k → 20%UNLISTED PROJECTS: $7k → 10%PORTLAND INSTITUTE OF CONTEMPORARY ART: $7k → 12%HYDE PARK ART CENTER: $7k → 14%LITTLE RED HAND LLC: $10k → 23%AXIS DANCE COMPANY: $10k → 10%MOVEMENT RESEARCH INC: $7k → 17%ART IN GENERAL: $7k → 20%UNLISTED PROJECTS: $7k → 10%PICA: $7k → 12%HYDE PARK ART CENTER: $6k → 14%PARSE NOLA: $6k → 23%MOVEMENT RESEARCH INC: $7k → 17%UNLISTED PROJECTS: $6k → 10%PORTLAND INSTITUTE OF CONTEMPORARY ART: $7k → 12%HYDE PARK ART CENTER: $5k → 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

MN
IL
NY
MA
OR
OH
CA
CO
MO
MD
LA
TX

Grants abroad, by region: $53k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 2 regions, all to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Russia and Neighboring States$32k · 60% · 6 people

Stated purpose: INTERNATIONAL ARTS EXCHANGE

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$21k · 40% · 4 people

Stated purpose: INTERNATIONAL ARTS EXCHANGE

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

48%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$122k · 5 repeat orgs$133k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +31% since the first grant, against +15% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
16

Total granted

$122k
$115k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+31%
+15%

Still filing today

100%
88%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 41% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $18k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’21’22’23’24
Arts & CultureEducationOther
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

  • PORTLAND INSTITUTE FOR CONTEMPORARY ART
    4× · 2018–2022 · $31k · revenue +9%
  • UP
    UNLISTED PROJECTS
    4× · 2018–2023 · $30k · revenue +552% · 93% of their budget
  • KA
    Kala Art Institute
    3× · 2018–2024 · $20k · revenue +31%

Funded once

  • AD
    AXIS Dance Company
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue -70%
  • LR
    LITTLE RED HAND LLC
    one grant, 2022 · $10k
  • TI
    THE ID ART CENTER INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue +36%
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
California Institute of Contemporary Art
—
2
Kadist Collection Manager Inc
Arts & Culture
3
The Florence Center for Contemporary Music
Arts & Culture
4
Art Foundation
Arts & Culture
5
Artpace Inc (Audit)

Artpace san antonio is a nonprofit residency program which supports texas, national, and international artists in the creation of new art. see schedule o for continuation.

Arts & Culture
6
International Contemporary Art Foundatio
Arts & Culture
7
Willapa Bay AiR
Arts & Culture
8
Berggruen Institute
Education
9
New Art Association
Arts & Culture
10
Los Angeles Performance Practice

As creative producers, we are devoted to the production and presentation of groundbreaking experiences in contemporary performance that use innovative approaches to collaboration, technology, and social engagement. As a service…

Arts & Culture
11
The Tank Ltd

The Tank is a small, Manhattan-based non-profit arts presenter and producer serving emerging artists. Our goal is to remove economic barriers from the creation of new work for artists launching their careers or experimenting within their…

Arts & Culture
12
Galveston Artist Residency
Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Laumeier Sculpture Park; the most unlike its peers is Zero1 the Art & Technology Network. 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

22 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. 22 of the 24 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
22/22
Grantees still filing
14/22
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PORTLAND INSTITUTE FOR CONTEMPORARY ART: $31,000 · Arts & CulturePORTLAND INSTITUTE FOR CONTEMPORARY ARTUNLISTED PROJECTS: $30,000 · Arts & CultureUNLISTED PROJECTSHYDE PARK ART CENTER: $27,825 · Arts & CultureHYDE PARK ART CENTERKala Art Institute: $19,650 · Arts & CultureKala Art InstituteMOVEMENT RESEARCH INC: $13,500 · Arts & CultureMOVEMENT RESEARCH INCAXIS Dance Company: $10,020 · Arts & CultureTHE ID ART CENTER INC: $10,000 · Arts & CultureTHE DANCE EXCHANGE INC: $9,814 · Arts & Culture+11 more: $68,525 · Arts & Culture+11 moreLITTLE RED HAND LLC: $10,000 · OtherLITTLE RED H…Zero1 The Art & Technology Network: $6,500 · OtherZero1 The Ar…LOS ANGELES POVERTY DEPARTMENT: $6,260 · OtherLOS ANGELES …PARSE NOLA: $6,150 · OtherPARSE NOLAThe New School: $5,550 · Education
Arts & Culture$220,334Other$28,910Education$5,550

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPORTLAND INSTITUTE FOR CONTEMPORARY ART: $31,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetUNLISTED PROJECTS: $30,000 over 4y, 93% of budgetHYDE PARK ART CENTER: $27,825 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetKala Art Institute: $19,650 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetMOVEMENT RESEARCH INC: $13,500 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetAXIS Dance Company: $10,020 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetTHE ID ART CENTER INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetTHE DANCE EXCHANGE INC: $9,814 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetMAGNUM CULTURAL FOUNDATION: $6,750 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetART IN GENERAL INC: $6,500 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetTHE BRICK: $6,500 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetContemporary Arts Center: $6,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetZero1 The Art & Technology Network: $6,500 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetLAUMEIER SCULPTURE PARK: $6,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetFINE ARTS WORK CENTER IN PROVINCETOWN INC: $6,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCLEVELAND PUBLIC THEATRE INC: $6,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetLOS ANGELES POVERTY DEPARTMENT: $6,260 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetFOUND SOUND NATION INC: $6,250 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetWESTERN STATES ARTS FEDERATION: $5,600 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetThe New School: $5,550 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE LUMINARY INC: $5,525 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetSECOND SHIFT STUDIO SPACE OF ST PAUL: $5,400 over 1y, 8.8% 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 Andy Warhol Found…The Andrew W Mellon F…Kenneth Rainin Founda…The J Paul Getty TrustNew England Foundatio…The William & Flora H…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …American Online Givin…Amazonsmile Foundation
The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts IncNY26× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts Inc · The Andrew W Mellon Foundation · Kenneth Rainin Foundation · The J Paul Getty Trust · New England Foundation for the Arts Incorporated · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Cec Artslink Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Cec Artslink Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 27%
  • Fine Arts Work Center in Provincetown Inc: 27% of income from government
  • Portland Institute for Contemporary Art: 5% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Cec Artslink Inc?

Find your warmest path to Cec Artslink 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.

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 24 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 Cec Artslink’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