· Private foundation
Foundation For Advancing Technology And Community Giving
Its FY2018 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 49% of Foundation For Advancing Technology And Community Giving’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2018
- Under $10k41 grants · $53k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $109k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $151k
- $250k+1 grant · $445k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Foundation for Learning and Develop | $445,000 |
| University of Iowa Hospitals and Cl | $98,474 |
| PEF Israel Endowmwnt Funds Inc | $52,375 |
| United Way | $36,204 |
| Cures Within Reach | $29,584 |
| Shed Aquarium Society | $25,000 |
| Iowa City Area Development | $18,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $9,000 |
| Habitat for Humanity | $6,912 |
| San Diego Habitat for Humanity | $5,532 |
| Grid Alternatives San Diego Inc | $5,000 |
| NCSY | $3,600 |
| Ronald McDonald House | $2,852 |
| ICPR Foundation | $2,128 |
| Wheelchair Ramp Accessibility Progr | $1,940 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–18, $20k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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.
17 repeat relationships — 17 still active in FY2018, 0 since wound down; 29 grantees were first funded in FY2018 (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 FY2018, 26% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $519k 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
- TITHE IOWA CHILDREN'S MUSEUM2× · 2017–2018 · $5k · revenue +17%
- TTTHE TALKING FARM2× · 2017–2018 · $2k · revenue +68%
- RHREUBEN H FLEET SCIENCE CENTER2× · 2017–2018 · $376 · revenue +12%
Funded once
- UOUniv of Iowa Hospital Foundationone grant, 2017 · $360k
- AFAMERICAN FRIENDS OF HALAgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $219k · revenue +112%
- UOUniversity of Iowaone grant, 2017 · $71k
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 Marine Biological Laboratory (MBL) is a world-renowned center for biological discovery and training that is notably affiliated with more than 60 Nobel Prize winners. Research is conducted by full-time faculty as well as hundreds of the…
The organization provides peer reviewed scientific research and education in the field of biological dentistry.
Our mission is to accelerate scientific progress, understand the root causes of disease, and narrow the gap between discoveries and impact on patients.
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
Our mission is to invest in and accelerate the development of the most promising future leaders in biomedical research with global impact.
Ilsi is a global, nonprofit federation dedicated to generating and advancing emerging science and groundbreaking research to ensure foods are safe, nutritious and sustainable, and that they improve planetary and human health and well-being…
The fsmb serves as the voice for state medical boards, supporting them through education, assessment, research and advocacy while providing services and initiatives that promote patient safety, quality health care and regulatory best…
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
To promote and advance the microbial sciences
We conduct fundamental infectious disease research to generate critical new knowledge about pathogens and their interactions with see schedule o for continuationhumans to enable the discovery and development of novel interventions,…
California ocean science trust (ost) is a non-profit organization dedicated to accelerating progress towards a healthy and productive ocean future for california. created by state legislation, ost bridges the gap between cutting-edge…
The Institute is a scientific research center dedicated to conducting basic and applied research to advance the understanding of human disease and the improvement of human health. The Institute fosters an innovative research environment…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Field Museum of Natural History and the most unlike its peers is Walder Operations Ltd. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 39 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) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% 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.
34 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. 34 of the 85 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 Walder Operations Ltd ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF HALA ↗
- Who funds FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY ↗
- Who funds PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC ↗
- Who funds SHEDD AQUARIUM SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
- Who funds GLOUCESTER MARINE GENOMICS INSTITUTE INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds SAN DIEGO HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC ↗
- Who funds THE IOWA CHILDREN'S MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds Save The Bay ↗
- Who funds THE TALKING FARM ↗
- Who funds BUR OAK LAND TRUST ↗
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: GreenState Credit Union · The Kenneth K Kinsey Family Foundation · Community Foundation of Johnson County · Walder Foundation · Greater Cedar Rapids Community Foundation · Alliant Energy Foundation Inc · Edward Jones Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc
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 Foundation For Advancing Technology And Community Giving 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.
- Gloucester Marine Genomics Institute Incorporated — 16% 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 Foundation For Advancing Technology And Community Giving?
Find your warmest path to Foundation For Advancing Technology And Community Giving 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.