Skip to content
FLEXTECH ALLIANCE INC DBA NextFlex at a glance

· 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 it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01FY2017 · 22 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 22 grants below total $5,904,764, the rows itemized in this filing. The $6,542,100 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $637,336 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 · FY2017

  • $10k–50k5 grants · $124k
  • $50k–250k8 grants · $1.3M
  • $250k+9 grants · $4.5M
$218,687
Median grant
12
States reached
$68M
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

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 (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 its 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
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
NY
MA
IA
IN
OH
CT
CA
CO
MO
GA
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 field
03the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 22 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
7/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and 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 grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's 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
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.

  • 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 ↗

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Johns Hopkins Univers…
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

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 FLEXTECH ALLIANCE INC DBA NextFlex funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from FLEXTECH ALLIANCE INC DBA NextFlex. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's 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, 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 22 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 2017, released 2017. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) 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

    Play a game based on FLEXTECH ALLIANCE INC DBA NextFlex’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