· Public charity
Code for Science & Society Inc
Code for science and society, inc.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 4 grants below total $2,844,158 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $4,417,332 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $1,573,174 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 · FY2025
- $10k–50k1 grant · $16k
- $250k+3 grants · $2.8M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| DISTRIBUTED AI RESEARCH INSTITUTE | $1,070,672 |
| ALLIED MEDIA PROJECTS | $1,007,652 |
| OPENREVIEW | $750,000 |
| GEORGIA TECH FOUNDATION INC | $15,834 |
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 (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 38% of your 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 +43% since the first grant, against +19% for the ones you funded once.
4 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2.8M 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
COMMUNITY INITIATIVES2× · 2021–2023 · $350k · revenue +92%
OPENCOLLECTIVE FOUNDATION3× · 2021–2024 · $120k · revenue -100%
SOFTWARE FREEDOM CONSERVANCY INC2× · 2020–2022 · $20k · revenue 0%
Funded once
- NBNATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH INCone grant, 2022 · $146k · revenue +12%
- TETHE EQUITY ENGINEone grant, 2024 · $100k
Cornell Universityone grant, 2021 · $32k · revenue +23%
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.
See schedule onorc at the university of chicago conducts research and data science on critical societal issues to guide decision-making and the development of programs and public policy. our experts identify relationships and trends, and…
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
Orcid provides an identifier for individuals to use with their name as they engage in research, scholarship, and innovation activities. we provide open tools that enable transparent and trustworthy connections between researchers, their…
Develops legal and technical infrastructure for digital creativity, sharing, and innovation.
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…
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…
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…
The center for open science (cos) is dedicated to increasing openness, integrity, and reproducibility in scholarly research.
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Georgia Tech Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Appropedia Foundation 2084. 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 24 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 10% of your grantees by number, and just 49% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
20 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. 20 of the 25 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 DISTRIBUTED ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE RESEARCH INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds ALLIED MEDIA PROJECTS INC ↗
- Who funds OPENREVIEW FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY INITIATIVES ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH INC ↗
- Who funds OPENCOLLECTIVE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Cornell University ↗
- Who funds WORKER RIGHTS CONSORTIUM INC ↗
- Who funds OPEN ENVIRONMENTAL DATA INC ↗
- Who funds PUBLIC LABORATORY FOR OPEN TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE INC ↗
- Who funds GETTYSBURG COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds SOFTWARE FREEDOM CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds OPEN SOURCE COLLECTIVE ↗
- Who funds NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds GEORGIA TECH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds MARCUS A FOSTER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds APPROPEDIA FOUNDATION 2084 ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL COMPUTER SCIENCE INSTITUTE ↗
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: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · 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 Code for Science & Society 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.
- National Bureau of Economic Research Inc — 48% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston University — 12% 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 Code for Science & Society Inc?
Find your warmest path to Code for Science & Society 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.