Skip to content
Cortex at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Cortex

Founded in 2002, CORTEX mission is the creation of the midwest's premier innovation hub of bioscience and technology research, development and commercialization, serving as the anchor of st.

$2.3M
Granted FY2023
10
Grants FY2023
2
States reached
$1.2M
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, FY2018 to 2023.

Employment$2.1MArts & Culture$508kFood & Nutrition$150kCommunity Improvement$105kHuman Services$8kEnvironment$6k
02FY2023 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 10 grants below total $2,167,492, the rows itemized in this filing. The $2,273,404 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $105,912 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.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k3 grants · $21k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $54k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $410k
  • $250k+2 grants · $1.7M
$110,290
Median grant
2
States reached
$82M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PER SCHOLAS$1,206,735
LAUNCHCODE$475,000
CYBERUP$150,000
PROPEL KITCHENS$150,000
NPOWER$110,290
TECH STL$37,500
GLOBAL INSTITUTE ON INNOVATION DISTRICTS$16,667
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ST LOUIS$8,000
PARK CENTRAL DEVELOPMENT$7,000
MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDENS$6,300
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:

Its human-services grants (FY23–23, $8k) land where the poverty rate runs at 21%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ST LOUIS: $8k → 21%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.
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.

23%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$646k · 3 repeat orgs$2.2M to everyone else

3 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2023, 2 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
2

Total granted

$646k
$508k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-59%
+25%

Still filing today

67%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 22% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.7M went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’23
Community ImprovementArts & CultureEmploymentFood & NutritionScience & TechHuman ServicesOther
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

  • TL
    THE LAUNCHCODE FOUNDATION
    3× · 2019–2024 · $603k · revenue -14%
  • VC
    VENTURE CAFE ST LOUIS
    3× · 2018–2020 · $30k · revenue -99%
  • VF
    VENTURE FOR AMERICA INC
    2× · 2019–2020 · $14k · revenue -59%

Funded once

  • TM
    THE MAGIC HOUSEgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $500k · revenue +25%
  • CO
    CENTER OF CREATIVE ARTS
    one grant, 2018 · $8k · revenue -46%
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
Api Innovation Center

Drive national health security and economic growth through u.s.-based production of medicines so that every patient, health care system and pharmacy retailer has access to critical medicines.

Human Services
2
St Louis Economic Development Partnership

Economic development.

—
3
Cortex

Founded in 2002, cortex mission is the creation of the midwest's premier innovation hub of bioscience and technology research, development and commercialization, serving as the anchor of st. louis' growing ecosystem for innovative startup…

Community Improvement
4
St Louis Regional Chamber & Growth Association

Greater st. louis, inc. brings together business and civic leaders to create jobs, drive inclusive economic growth, and increase the st. louis metro area's global competitiveness. we speak with a unified voice, lead with a bold agenda, and…

—
5
Biogenerator

To advance st. louis' regional prosperity by cultivating a thriving biosciences sector. biogenerator pursues this mission by producing for the region a robust pipeline of successful bioscience companies and entrepreneurs.

Science & Tech
6
Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce

The chicagoland chamber of commerce combines the power of people, with our legacy of leadership and business advocacy, to drive a dynamic economy. we focus on delivering value for our members, making chicagoland a world-class place to live…

—
7
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
8
Teach St Louis

Founded In 2018, Teach St. Louis (formerly St. Louis Teacher Residency) launched to improve teacher quality and retention in St. Louis, a city where 40% of new teachers exit the classroom in their first three years. Teach St. Louis…

Education
9
P33

Tranform chicago into a tier one technology and innovation hub and promote inclusive economic growth.

Community Improvement
10
Global Technology Industry Association Inc

The organization is dedicated to advancing information technology industry growth through its educational programs, market research, networking events, professional certifications, and public policy advocacy.

—
11
Urban League of Louisiana

To empower communities and help change liver for african americans and other emerging communities and groups. the urban league seeks to eliminate barriers to opportunity and assist individuals in attaining economic self sufficiency.

Human Services
12
Missouri Cybersecurity Center of Excellence - Mccoe

Accelerating the springfield, mo cyber economy and positioning it as a state hub of cyber innovation.

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Greater St Louis Inc; the most unlike its peers is Npower Inc. 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

19 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/19
Grantees still filing
8/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PER SCHOLAS INC: $1,206,735 · EmploymentPER SCHOLAS INCTHE LAUNCHCODE FOUNDATION: $602,701 · EducationTHE LAUNCHCODE FOUNDATI…THE MAGIC HOUSE: $500,000 · Arts & CultureTHE MAGIC HOUSE+1 more: $7,500 · Arts & CultureNPOWER INC: $110,290 · Community ImprovementTECHSTL: $37,500 · Community ImprovementVENTURE CAFE ST LOUIS: $29,665 · Community ImprovementTHE GLOBAL INSTITUTE ON INNOVATION DISTRICTS INC: $16,667 · Community ImprovementVENTURE FOR AMERICA INC: $14,000 · Community Improvement+1 more: $7,000 · Community ImprovementPROPEL KITCHENS: $150,000 · Food & NutritionCyberUp: $150,000 · Science & TechINTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF METROPOLITAN ST LOUIS: $8,000 · Human ServicesMISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN BOARD OF TRUSTEES: $6,300 · Environment
Employment$1,206,735Education$602,701Arts & Culture$507,500Community Improvement$215,122Food & Nutrition$150,000Science & Tech$150,000Human Services$8,000Environment$6,300

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPER SCHOLAS INC: $1,206,735 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetTHE LAUNCHCODE FOUNDATION: $602,701 over 3y, 3.3% of budgetTHE MAGIC HOUSE: $500,000 over 1y, 6.5% of budgetPROPEL KITCHENS: $150,000 over 2y, 11% of budgetCyberUp: $150,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetNPOWER INC: $110,290 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetTECHSTL: $37,500 over 2y, 11% of budgetVENTURE CAFE ST LOUIS: $29,665 over 3y, 2.7% of budgetTHE GLOBAL INSTITUTE ON INNOVATION DISTRICTS INC: $16,667 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetVENTURE FOR AMERICA INC: $14,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetINTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF METROPOLITAN ST LOUIS: $8,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCENTER OF CREATIVE ARTS: $7,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPARK CENTRAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $7,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetMISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN BOARD OF TRUSTEES: $6,300 over 2y, 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.

St Louis Community Fo…Regional Business Cou…Commerce Bancshares F…World Wide Technology…Washington UniversityEnterprise Holdings F…The Bank of America C…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
St Louis Community Foundation IncMO17.3× affinity6 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: St Louis Community Foundation Inc · Regional Business Council · Commerce Bancshares Foundation · World Wide Technology Foundation · Washington University · Enterprise Holdings Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Cortex funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Cortex. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%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
    2report 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 14 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports $4.0M of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2023, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Cortex’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