Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Current Innovation NFP

Current's mission is to grow an inclusive blue economy, accelerate innovation, and solve persistent water challenges.

$1.9M
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$378k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20192024.

Science & Tech$573kEducation$378kEmployment$346kRecreation & Sports$250kEnvironment$165k
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 8 grants below total $1,696,958 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $1,905,628 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $208,670 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 · FY2024

  • $50k–250k5 grants · $752k
  • $250k+3 grants · $945k
$187,025
Median grant
5
States reached
$4.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Marquette University$377,538
University of Minnesota$317,540
Northwestern University$250,365
Hire 360$187,025
National Fund for Workforce Solutions$159,011
Cleveland Water Alliance$150,000
University of Cincinnati$136,141
Ohio State University$119,338
02The need
03

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY19–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 76% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%University of Minnesota: $318k → 11%National Fund for Workforce Solutions: $159k → 14%Ohio State University: $119k → 15%University of Cincinnati: $136k → 16%Cleveland Water Alliance: $150k → 17%North River Commission: $5k → 14%Hire 360: $187k → 14%Friends of the Chicago River: $5k → 14%Northwestern University: $250k → 14%South Loop Chamber of Commerce: $5k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

03Your field

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.

1
Loyola University of Chicago

We are chicago's jesuit, catholic university - a diverse community seeking god in all things and working to expand knowledge in the service of humanity through learning, justice, and faith.

Education
2
Local Economic and Employment Development Council Inc

North Branch Works is a membership-supported nonprofit neighborhood organization that for more than three decades has promoted balanced, job-creating economic development along the North Branch of the Chicago River.

Employment
3
South East Chicago Commission

SECC collaborates with other University of Chicago businesses and organizations to foster a spirit of community and to enhance ongoing quality of life across neighborhoods it serves

4
Concurrent Technologies Corporation

Concurrent Technologies Corporation (CTC) provides applied scientific research & development services, in the public interest, to develop innovative technology and management solutions.

Science & Tech
5
Milwaukee Development Corporation

-instigate, implement, participate in and promote such activities as shall, in the judgment of mdc, tend to support the general community interest in a strong, vital, aesthetically exciting and economically viable greater milwaukee…

Community Improvement
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
Michigan Chamber of Commerce

To promote conditions favorable to job creation and business success in michigan.

8
Saint Xavier University

Saint xavier university, a catholic institution inspired by the heritage of the sisters of mercy, educates persons to search for truth, think critically, communicate effectively and serve wisely and compassionately in support of human…

Education
9
University of Chicago

The mission of the university of chicago has been to sustain at the highest level of excellence, the communication of knowledge, the creation of knowledge and the fostering of a dynamic community of scholars and students.

Education
10
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
11
Columbus Compact Corporation

Columbus compact is a catalyst for positive development of central city columbus' neighborhoods and business districts.

Community Improvement
12
Current Innovation Nfp

Current's mission is to grow an inclusive blue economy, accelerate innovation, and solve persistent water challenges.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Fund for Workforce Solutions and the most unlike its peers is Marquette University. 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

8 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 11 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
4/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

University of Minnesota — $317,540 · OtherUniversity of MinnesotaUniversity of Cincinnati — $136,141 · OtherUniversity of CincinnatiOhio State University — $119,338 · OtherOhio State University+1 more — $5,000 · OtherMarquette University — $377,538 · EducationMarquette UniversityHIRE360 — $187,025 · EmploymentHIRE360NATIONAL FUND FOR WORKFORCE SOLUTIONS — $159,011 · EmploymentNATIONAL FUND FOR WORK…Northwestern University — $250,365 · Recreation & SportsNorthwestern Uni…CLEVELAND WATER ALLIANCE — $150,000 · EnvironmentCLEVELAND…NORTH RIVER COMMISSION — $5,000 · Community ImprovementFRIENDS OF THE CHICAGO RIVER — $5,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$578,019Education$377,538Employment$346,036Recreation & Sports$250,365Environment$150,000Community Improvement$5,000Arts & Culture$5,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetMarquette University — $377,538 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNorthwestern University — $250,365 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHIRE360 — $187,025 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetNATIONAL FUND FOR WORKFORCE SOLUTIONS — $159,011 over 1y, 9.2% of budgetCLEVELAND WATER ALLIANCE — $150,000 over 1y, 5.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE CHICAGO RIVER — $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSOUTH LOOP CHAMBER OF COMMERCE — $5,000 over 1y, 5.9% of budget
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.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization Current Innovation NFP 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%your 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, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 11 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph