· Public charity
Georgia Research Alliance Inc
To allow business, research universities and state government to collaborate to build a technology-driven economy fueled by innovative university research.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 8 grants below total $2,523,527 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $5,647,107 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $3,123,580 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 · FY2025
- $10k–50k2 grants · $60k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $321k
- $250k+3 grants · $2.1M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| GEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION | $1,009,410 |
| EMORY UNIVERSITY | $823,661 |
| THE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA RESEARCH FOUNDATION | $309,387 |
| GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION | $174,842 |
| KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION | $96,227 |
| Individual grant recipient | $50,000 |
| AUGUSTA UNIVERSITY | $35,000 |
| CLARK ATLANTA UNIVERSITY | $25,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 98% of your 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.
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 6% of Georgia Research Alliance Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 99% of the giving stays in GA; read by stated purpose it is 94% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +78% since the first grant, against +13% for the ones you funded once.
15 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $50k 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
- GTGEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION9× · 2017–2025 · $14M · revenue +69%
- UOUniversity of Georgia Research Foundation Inc7× · 2017–2023 · $5.0M · revenue +80%
- TUTHE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA FOUNDATION4× · 2018–2025 · $2.5M · revenue +82%
Funded once
- GIGEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGYone grant, 2018 · $750k
- ABANDSON BIOTECH INCone grant, 2024 · $325k
- JMJACKSON MEDICAL GROUP INCone grant, 2024 · $225k
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.
Augusta university research institute, inc. (the "institute") was incorporated under the laws of the state of georgia as a nonprofit corporation on july 31, 1980. the institute qualified as a tax-exempt corporation under section 501(c)(3)…
The georgia tech applied research corporation (gtarc) is organized and operated to support the research activities of the georgia institute of technology in the areas of innovative research, technical assistance and economic development.
The UGA Real Estate Foundation manages and improves various real estate assets for the benefit of the University of Georgia, governed by the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia. The UGA Real Estate Foundation may also…
Assist and further research at georgia southern university
The mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…
The graduate school of the stowers institute for medical research ("gssimr") exempt purpose is to provide graduate education that will prepare scholars for scientific research in the biological sciences.
It is the mission of the georgia tech foundation, inc., to: 1. promote the cause of higher education in the state of georgia; 2. receive and manage financial donations received by the foundation for support and enhancement of the georgia…
The mission of the University System of Georgia Foundation, a cooperative organization of the Board of Regents, is to support and advance the work of the University System of Georgia consistent with the University System's Strategic Plan.
The association shall empower alumni to forge enduring connections with their alma mater, each other, and the wider community. the association shall enrich the lives of alumni through a spectrum of valuable services, including dynamic…
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
The university's goal in the coming decade is to advance learning through the integration of teaching, research and service to others. the core of this goal is to prepare graduates to engage with the world and lead lives of meaning. to do…
To provide advice, guidance, and leadership to advance and promote athletics at georgia state university.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Georgia State University Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Georgia Center for Oncology Research and Education Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
14 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. 14 of the 40 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 GEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds DEKALB MEDICAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds University of Georgia Research Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds Emory University ↗
- Who funds THE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Georgia State University Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds MOREHOUSE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE ↗
- Who funds KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH AND SERVICE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Clark Atlanta University Inc ↗
- Who funds SHEPHERD CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE CORPORATION OF MERCER UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds GEORGIA CENTER FOR ONCOLOGY RESEARCH AND EDUCATION INC ↗
- Who funds Georgia Southern University Foundation Inc ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Emory 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 Georgia Research Alliance Inc 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.
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.