Skip to content
Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc

Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region.

$54k
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$13k
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.

Community Improvement$2.6MScience & Tech$644kEducation$95kEmployment$64kFood & Nutrition$50kSocial Science$11kAnimals$10kCivil Rights$10kOther$0
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $34,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $54,000 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $20,000 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.
$11,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$7.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NORTHEAST INDIANA REGIONAL PARTNERSHIP INC$12,500
ECONOMIC CLUB OF INDIANA INC$11,500
GREATER INDIANAPOLIS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE$10,000
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 10%. 99% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%ROADTRIP NATION LTD: $10k → 10%CLEMSON UNIVERSITY: $53k → 16%AKER TECHNOLOGIES INC: $25k → 11%CAREERWISE COLORADO: $16k → 12%INDY WOMEN IN TECH INC: $10k → 5%NORTHEAST INDIANA REGIONAL PARTNERSHIP INC: $13k → 12%BATTERY INNOVATION CENTER INC: $1.4M → 13%ECONOMIC CLUB OF INDIANA INC: $12k → 16%CIVIC CHAMPS INC: $25k → 18%ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $10k → 14%INDY WOMEN IN TECH INC: $8k → 5%NORTHEAST INDIANA REGIONAL PARTNERSHIP INC: $10k → 12%BATTERY INNOVATION CENTER INC: $736k → 13%ECONOMIC CLUB OF INDIANA INC: $10k → 16%INDY WOMEN IN TECH: $5k → 5%NORTHEAST INDIANA REGIONAL PARTNERSHIP INC: $10k → 12%BATTERY INNOVATION CENTER INC: $381k → 13%ECONOMIC CLUB OF INDIANA INC: $10k → 16%NORTHEAST INDIANA REGIONAL PARTNERSHIP INC: $10k → 12%BATTERY INNOVATION CENTER INC: $211k → 13%ECONOMIC CLUB OF INDIANA: $10k → 16%NORTHEAST INDIANA REGIONAL PARTNERSHIP INC: $10k → 12%INDIANA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION INC: $46k → 16%LEADERSHIP INDIANAPOLIS INC: $13k → 16%GREATER INDIANAPOLIS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $10k → 16%LEADERSHIP INDIANAPOLIS INC: $10k → 16%LEADERSHIP INDIANAPOLIS INC: $8k → 16%INDIANAPOLIS ZOO: $5k → 16%LEADERSHIP INDIANAPOLIS INC: $5k → 16%LEADERSHIP INDIANAPOLIS: $5k → 16%INDIANAPOLIS ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY INC: $5k → 16%VISIT INDY INC: $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

IL
MI
IN
PA
CA
CO
MO
MD
SC
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.

78%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.7M · 8 repeat orgs$792k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +28% since the first grant, against +17% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
11

Total granted

$2.7M
$782k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+28%
+17%

Still filing today

88%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 71% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EducationCommunity ImprovementCivil RightsScience & TechPublic BenefitAnimalsOther
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

  • BI
    BATTERY INNOVATION CENTER INC
    3× · 2018–2020 · $2.5M · revenue +457% · 86% of their budget
  • EC
    Economic Club of Indiana Inc
    7× · 2017–2024 · $81k · revenue +58%
  • NI
    NORTHEAST INDIANA REGIONAL PARTNERSHIP INC
    5× · 2018–2024 · $53k · revenue +12%

Funded once

  • CT
    CONSUMER TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $355k · revenue +504%
  • BI
    BATTERY INNOVATION CENTER INSTITUTE
    one grant, 2021 · $211k · revenue -33%
  • CU
    CLEMSON UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2021 · $53k
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
Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc

Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…

Community Improvement
2
Indianapolis Downtown Marketing Inc

Indianapolis Downtown Marketing, Inc. (IDMI) exists to improve downtown Indianapolis. IDMI focuses on marketing downtown businesses, destinations, organizations, activities and events.

—
3
Independent Insurance Agents of Indiana

To enhance the competitive position and fulfill business requirements of independent agents and brokers, advocating buyer interest, and continually striving to be the premier trade association.

—
4
Indiana Innovation Council Inc

Promote and educate indiana residents on the state's economic success and positive gains.

—
5
Enroll Indy Inc

Enroll indy helps families choose schools that meet their children's needs by providing a one-stop enrollment process, school information that is relevant and easy to understand, and data to inform school improvement in indianapolis,…

Education
6
University Family Physicians Inc

Engage actively and continuously in medical research, education and training in the practice of medicine in conjunction with the department of family medicine of the indiana university school of medicine and indiana university…

—
7
Northeast Indiana Innovation Center Inc

We are a comprehensive entrepreneurial center whose mission is putting business growth, innovation and entrepreneurship to work for northeast indiana

Community Improvement
8
Ohio Business Roundtable

To harness the collective expertise of ohio's ceos to advocate for policies that improve ohio's economic competitiveness.

—
9
Indiana University Health West Hospital Inc

Lead the transformation of healthcare through quality, innovation & education, and make Indiana one of the nation's healthiest states.

Health
10
Indiana Agribusiness Council Inc

An agribusiness network advocate, representing members' interests within all levels of government and keeping members informed of the latest industry trends and news.

—
11
Indiana Chamber of Commerce Inc

To cultivate a world-class environment which provides economic opportunity and prosperity for the people of indiana and their enterprises. see schedule o.

—
12
Indiana University Health Frankfort Inc

Lead the transformation of healthcare through quality, innovation & education, and make Indiana one of the nation's healthiest states.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Indiana Economic Development Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Careerwise Colorado. 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

16 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. 16 of the 20 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/16
Grantees still filing
10/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BATTERY INNOVATION CENTER INC: $2,477,576 · Community ImprovementBATTERY INNOVATION CENTER INCCONSUMER TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION: $355,200 · Community ImprovementCONSUMER TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION+1 more: $46,227 · Community ImprovementCLEMSON UNIVERSITY: $53,000 · OtherNORTHEAST INDIANA REGIONAL PARTNERSHIP INC: $52,500 · OtherCIVIC CHAMPS INC: $25,000 · OtherAKER TECHNOLOGIES INC: $25,000 · OtherINDY WOMEN IN TECH INC: $23,000 · OtherIndiana University School of Medicine: $11,000 · OtherGreater Indianapolis Chamber of Commerce Inc: $10,000 · OtherROADTRIP NATION LTD: $10,000 · Other+1 more: $5,000 · OtherBATTERY INNOVATION CENTER INSTITUTE: $211,182 · Science & TechEconomic Club of Indiana Inc: $81,000 · EducationPurdue Research Foundation: $50,000 · EducationUS Chamber of Commerce Foundation: $25,000 · EducationCAREERWISE COLORADO: $16,000 · EducationLeadership Indianapolis Inc: $40,500 · Public BenefitIndianapolis Zoological Society Inc: $10,000 · AnimalsANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $10,000 · Civil Rights
Community Improvement$2,879,003Other$214,500Science & Tech$211,182Education$172,000Public Benefit$40,500Animals$10,000Civil Rights$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 budgetBATTERY INNOVATION CENTER INC: $2,477,576 over 3y, 86% of budgetCONSUMER TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION: $355,200 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetBATTERY INNOVATION CENTER INSTITUTE: $211,182 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetEconomic Club of Indiana Inc: $81,000 over 7y, 9.0% of budgetNORTHEAST INDIANA REGIONAL PARTNERSHIP INC: $52,500 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetPurdue Research Foundation: $50,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLeadership Indianapolis Inc: $40,500 over 5y, 4.4% of budgetUS Chamber of Commerce Foundation: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetINDY WOMEN IN TECH INC: $23,000 over 3y, 2.7% of budgetCAREERWISE COLORADO: $16,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGreater Indianapolis Chamber of Commerce Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetIndianapolis Zoological Society Inc: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetROADTRIP NATION LTD: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVisit Indy Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

Lumina Foundation for…Cicp Foundation Inc
Lumina Foundation for Education IncIN15.3× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Lumina Foundation for Education Inc · Cicp Foundation Inc

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 Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Central Indiana Corporate Partnership 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%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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
    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 20 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 Central Indiana Corporate Partnership’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