Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

FLEXTECH ALLIANCE INC DBA NextFlex

To build a national network for advanced manufacturing of flexible hybrid electronics.

$6.5M
Granted FY2017
22
Grants FY2017
12
States reached
$784k
Largest
01What you fund
01FY2017 · 22 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 22 grants below total $5,904,764 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $6,542,100 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $637,336 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 · FY2017

  • $10k–50k5 grants · $124k
  • $50k–250k8 grants · $1.3M
  • $250k+9 grants · $4.5M
$218,687
Median grant
12
States reached
$61M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Sensor Films$784,142
BMNT Partners LLC$728,682
State University of New York at Binghamton$648,942
ITN Energy Systems Inc$625,530
The Boeing Company$402,792
Lockheed Martin$388,501
Purdue University$346,598
University of Massachusetts at Lowell$335,412
Molex LLC$255,261
Universal Instruments$247,737
PARC$218,687
SI2 Technologies Inc$167,801
Cal Poly Corporation$162,277
SEMI$150,069
Uniqarta Inc$126,097
02The need
02

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:

Your human-services grants (FY17–17, $27k) land where the poverty rate runs at 21%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%Southeast Michigan Community Alliance: $27k → 21%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.

Which US states your grants reach

IL
MI
NY
MA
IA
IN
OH
CT
CA
CO
MO
GA

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
03the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 22 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
7/7
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Sensor Films — $784,142 · OtherSensor FilmsBMNT Partners LLC — $728,682 · OtherBMNT Partners LLCITN Energy Systems Inc — $625,530 · OtherITN Energy Systems IncTHE BOEING COMPANY — $402,792 · OtherTHE BOEING COMPANYLOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION — $388,501 · OtherLOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATIONTRUSTEES OF PURDUE UNIVERSITY — $346,598 · OtherTRUSTEES OF PURDUE UNIVERSITYUNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS — $335,412 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTSMolex LLC — $255,261 · OtherUniversal Instruments — $247,737 · OtherPALO ALTO RESEARCH CENTER INC — $218,687 · OtherSI2 Technologies Inc — $167,801 · Other+5 more — $407,206 · Other+5 moreFOUNDATION OF THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BINGHAMTON INC — $648,942 · EducationFOUNDATION OF TH…CAL POLY CORPORATION — $162,277 · EducationCAL POLY CORPORA…LORAIN COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION — $31,694 · EducationIQM RESEARCH INSTITUTE — $103,226 · Science & TechSOUTHEAST MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ALLIANCE — $27,186 · Human ServicesGEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION — $23,090 · Health
Other$4,908,349Education$842,913Science & Tech$103,226Human Services$27,186Health$23,090

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

25%50%75%100%$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetFOUNDATION OF THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BINGHAMTON INC — $648,942 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetCAL POLY CORPORATION — $162,277 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSEMI — $150,069 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetLORAIN COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION — $31,694 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetSOUTHEAST MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ALLIANCE — $27,186 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION — $23,090 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds FOUNDATION OF THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BINGHAMTON INC
  • Who funds CAL POLY CORPORATION
  • Who funds SEMI
  • Who funds IQM RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • Who funds LORAIN COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION
  • Who funds SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ALLIANCE
  • Who funds GEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.

Johns Hopkins UniversityMD16.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Johns Hopkins University

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 FLEXTECH ALLIANCE INC DBA NextFlex 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%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    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 22 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 2017, released 2017. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2017, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph