Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Illinois Science and Energy Innovation Foundation

To support social welfare and economic development by providing financial and technical support for energy concepts and to provide consumer education regarding smart meters and related technologies and services.

$249k
Granted FY2023
3
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$142k
Largest
01What you fund
0176% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY20172023.

Environment$12MArts & Culture$2.2MCommunity Improvement$2.0MReligion$1.3MEducation$803kHuman Services$511kPublic Benefit$425kAnimals$160kHealth$95kOther$6.3M
02FY2023 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2023

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $42k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $206k
$64,859
Median grant
1
States reached
$26M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ILLINOIS SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COA$141,618
THE KINDLING GROUP$64,859
CITY OF CHICAGO$42,395
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:

Your human-services grants (FY17–22, $511k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%MATTOON AREA FAMILY YMCA: $121k → 18%SENIOR INDEPENDENT LIVING: $300k → 14%CENTER OF CONCERN: $15k → 14%CENTER OF CONCERN: $15k → 14%CENTER OF CONCERN: $15k → 14%CENTER OF CONCERN: $15k → 14%CENTER OF CONCERN: $15k → 14%ERIE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE: $15k → 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 edge
repeat funding

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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$24M · 27 repeat orgs$2.6M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +72% since the first grant, against +5% for the ones you funded once.

27 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2023, 24 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

27
20

Total granted

$24M
$2.6M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+72%
+5%

Still filing today

70%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
EnvironmentCommunity ImprovementEducationHuman ServicesArts & CultureReligionOther

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

  • CC
    CUB CONSUMER EDUCATION AND RESEARCH FUND
    6× · 2017–2022 · $5.7M · revenue +78% · 49% of their budget
  • EE
    Elevate Energy
    6× · 2017–2022 · $5.7M · revenue +221%
  • IS
    ILLINOIS SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COALITION
    6× · 2017–2023 · $1.8M · revenue +360% · 75% of their budget

Funded once

  • EI
    Eastern Illinois Universit
    one grant, 2018 · $400k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $355k
  • SI
    Seniors Independent Living Collaborative
    one grant, 2019 · $300k · revenue -75% · 100% of their budget

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your 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
Chicago's Environmental Fund
2
Chicago United for Equity

Connecting and amplifying the power of individuals to build a just, equitable, and inclusive city.

Civil Rights
3
Metropolitan Mayors Caucus

The caucus provides a forum through which the chief elected officials of the region cooperatively develop consensus on common public policy issues and multi-jurisdictional challenges. with a foundation of collaboration and consensus-based…

Community Improvement
4
True Chicago
Arts & Culture
5
Illinois Coalition for Jobs Growth and Prosperity

To promote job growth and communicate important issues to the public through information campaigns.

Community Improvement
6
Energy Education Council

Enhancing lives by promoting the safe & efficient use of electricity.

Education
7
Chicago Council on Science & Technology

The Chicago Council on Science and Technology's (C2ST) mission is to inspire and engage all segments of society about science and technology and their contributions to society.

Science & Tech
8
United Way of Illinois

Strengthen United Way movement in Illinois

Philanthropy
9
Illinois Environmental Council Education

To educate the public about environmental issues.

Environment
10
Chicago Gateway Green Committee

To beautify chicagoland's expressway system, its gateways andneighborhoods surrounding the expressways.

Environment
11
Energy Partnerships Innovation Center
12
Clean Energy Jobs and Justice Fund

The Clean Energy Jobs and Justice Funds (CEJJF) mission is to advance a fair and inclusive transition to clean energy across Illinois by expanding access to capital for clean energy businesses that face barriers to traditional financing,…

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Midwest Energy Efficiency Alliance and the most unlike its peers is Green Chicago Restaurant Coalition. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 22 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number21%0%<5yr14%6%5–10yr18%33%10–20yr17%30%20–35yr14%12%35–55yr16%18%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value21%0%<5yr14%3%5–10yr18%38%10–20yr17%47%20–35yr14%4%35–55yr16%7%55yr+

The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close 5% lost their exemption, against 15% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
5%
2/41
the rest of the field
15%
5,464/35,477

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.

04the grantee network

30 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. 30 of the 47 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.

6
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
11
Early backer (in before they grew)
27/30
Grantees still filing
23/30
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

CUB CONSUMER EDUCATION AND RESEARCH FUND — $5,746,676 · EnvironmentCUB CONSUMER EDUCATION AND RESEARCH FUNDElevate Energy — $5,668,310 · EnvironmentElevate EnergyFRESH ENERGY — $500,000 · Environment+4 more — $481,419 · EnvironmentBOARD OF TRUSTEES OF ILLINOIS STATE UNIVERSITY — $1,486,316 · OtherBOARD OF TRUSTEES OF ILLINOIS …THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS — $1,291,100 · OtherTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE U…CHICAGO COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $720,000 · OtherCHICAGO COMMUNITY FOUNDATIONEastern Illinois Universit — $399,540 · OtherEastern Illinois UniversitIndividual grant recipient — $354,720 · OtherCITY OF CHICAGO — $322,395 · OtherIllinois Green Economy Network Foundation Inc — $300,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS URBANA CHAMP — $300,000 · OtherCASH PAID VS ACCRUAL ADJUSTMENT — $288,624 · OtherMETROPOLITAN MAYORS CAUCUS FOUNDATION — $425,000 · OtherMETROPOLITAN MAYORS CAUCUS FOU…+15 more — $1,141,605 · Other+15 moreTHE KINDLING GROUP — $2,162,836 · Arts & CultureTHE KINDL…ILLINOIS SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COALITION — $1,793,664 · Community ImprovementGarfield Park Community Council — $90,000 · Community Improvement+3 more — $120,000 · Community ImprovementFAITH IN PLACE — $1,336,250 · ReligionChicago State Foundation — $550,000 · EducationHELPANSWERS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INCORPORATED — $200,000 · EducationLOYOLA UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO — $47,000 · Education+1 more — $6,000 · EducationSeniors Independent Living Collaborative — $300,000 · Human ServicesMATTOON AREA FAMILY YMCA CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION — $120,670 · Human ServicesTHE CENTER OF CONCERN — $75,000 · Human Services+1 more — $15,000 · Human Services
Environment$12,396,405Other$7,029,300Arts & Culture$2,162,836Community Improvement$2,003,664Religion$1,336,250Education$803,000Human Services$510,670

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 budgetCUB CONSUMER EDUCATION AND RESEARCH FUND — $5,746,676 over 6y, 49% of budgetElevate Energy — $5,668,310 over 6y, 5.0% of budgetTHE KINDLING GROUP — $2,162,836 over 7y, 54% of budgetILLINOIS SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COALITION — $1,793,664 over 6y, 75% of budgetFAITH IN PLACE — $1,336,250 over 5y, 21% of budgetChicago State Foundation — $550,000 over 5y, 9.9% of budgetFRESH ENERGY — $500,000 over 4y, 6.4% of budgetSeniors Independent Living Collaborative — $300,000 over 1y, 100% of budgetUS Green Building Council-Illinois — $230,000 over 6y, 17% of budgetSHEDD AQUARIUM SOCIETY — $159,880 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetMIDWEST ENERGY EFFICIENCY ALLIANCE — $159,500 over 4y, 1.4% of budgetMATTOON AREA FAMILY YMCA CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION — $120,670 over 1y, 3.9% of budgetCity Incite Inc — $95,000 over 4y, 14% of budgetGarfield Park Community Council — $90,000 over 6y, 2.9% of budgetSMART ENERGY CONSUMER COLLABORATIVE — $75,000 over 5y, 1.8% of budgetTHE CENTER OF CONCERN — $75,000 over 5y, 1.0% of budgetCHINESE AMERICAN SERVICE LEAGUE INC — $60,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CHICAGO INNOVATION FOUNDATION — $50,000 over 1y, 7.7% of budgetLOYOLA UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO — $47,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEMBARRAS RIVER BASIN AGENCY INC — $30,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE RENAISSANCE COLLABORATIVE INC — $30,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetILLINOIS SCIENCE AND ENERGY INNOVATION FUND — $16,919 over 1y, 100% of budgetERIE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE — $15,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCenter for Changing Lives — $15,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetGREEN CHICAGO RESTAURANT COALITION — $15,000 over 1y, 43% of budgetColumbia College Chicago — $6,000 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 CUB CONSUMER EDUCATION AND RESEARCH FUND
  • Who funds Elevate Energy
  • Who funds THE KINDLING GROUP
  • Who funds ILLINOIS SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COALITION
  • Who funds FAITH IN PLACE
  • Who funds Chicago State Foundation
  • Who funds FRESH ENERGY
  • Who funds METROPOLITAN MAYORS CAUCUS FOUNDATION
  • Who funds Seniors Independent Living Collaborative
  • Who funds Illinois Green Economy Network Foundation Inc
  • Who funds US Green Building Council-Illinois
  • Who funds HELPANSWERS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INCORPORATED
  • Who funds SHEDD AQUARIUM SOCIETY
  • Who funds MIDWEST ENERGY EFFICIENCY ALLIANCE
  • Who funds MATTOON AREA FAMILY YMCA CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION
  • Who funds City Incite Inc
  • Who funds Garfield Park Community Council
  • Who funds SMART ENERGY CONSUMER COLLABORATIVE
  • Who funds THE CENTER OF CONCERN
  • Who funds CHINESE AMERICAN SERVICE LEAGUE INC
  • Who funds THE CHICAGO INNOVATION FOUNDATION
  • Who funds Sweet Water Foundation Inc
  • Who funds LOYOLA UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
  • Who funds EMBARRAS RIVER BASIN AGENCY INC
  • Who funds THE RENAISSANCE COLLABORATIVE 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 tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

The Chicago Community TrustIL27.4× affinity17 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Chicago Community Trust · The Joyce Foundation · Arie and Ida Crown Memorial · Builders Vision Foundation · The Energy Foundation · United Way of Metropolitan Chicago Inc · United States Energy Foundation · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · Walder Foundation · Public Health Institute of Metropolitan Chicago · The Pierce Family Charitable Foundation · The Lumpkin Family Foundation

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 Illinois Science and Energy Innovation Foundation 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 · 10%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    8report 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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Illinois Science and Energy Innovation Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Illinois Science and Energy Innovation Foundation 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.

    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 47 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 2023, released 2023. 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 FY2023, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph