Skip to content
Illinois Science and Energy Innovation Foundation at a glance

· 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 it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2023.

Environment$13MEducation$3.8MArts & Culture$2.2MCommunity Improvement$2.0MReligion$1.3MPhilanthropy$770kPublic Benefit$747kHuman Services$654kOther$0
02FY2023 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

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

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 (FY17–22, $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 its 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
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.
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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

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

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +72% since the first grant, against +5% for those 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
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS URBANA CHAMP
    one grant, 2017 · $300k
How this is measured

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

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. 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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Midwest Energy Efficiency Alliance; 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.
04the grantee network

30 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. 30 of the 47 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.

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

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's 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 budgetCenter for Changing Lives: $15,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetGREEN CHICAGO RESTAURANT COALITION: $15,000 over 1y, 43% of budgetERIE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE: $15,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetColumbia College Chicago: $6,000 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 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 Illinois Green Economy Network Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds Seniors Independent Living Collaborative ↗
  • 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 ↗

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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

The Chicago Community…The Joyce FoundationArie and Ida Crown Me…Builders Vision Found…The Energy FoundationUnited Way of Metropo…United States Energy …John D and Catherine …Walder FoundationPublic Health Institu…The Pierce Family Cha…The Lumpkin Family Fo…
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

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 Illinois Science and Energy Innovation Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Illinois Science and Energy Innovation Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%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
    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, 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.
    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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 47 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 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

    Play a game based on Illinois Science and Energy Innovation’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