Skip to content
Indianafirst Inc First Indiana Robotics at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Indianafirst Inc First Indiana Robotics

The mission of first indiana robotics is to inspire young people in indiana to be science and technology leaders and innovators by engaging them in exciting mentor-based programs that build science, engineering, and technologies skills that inspire innovation and that foster well-rounded life capabilities including self-confidence,…

$200k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$35k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Science & Tech$546kEducation$139kPublic Safety & Disaster$28kYouth Development$16k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 7 grants below total $83,569, the rows itemized in this filing. The $200,260 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $116,691 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $35k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $48k
$6,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$79k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FIRST$35,074
WASHINGTON HIGH SCHOOL$13,000
461 BOOSTERS$9,495
CASTLE HIGH SCHOOL$6,500
PIKE CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL$6,500
BOSSE HIGH SCHOOL$6,500
MOUNT VERNON HIGH SCHOOL$6,500
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 24% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%EVANSVILLE COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT: $11k → 10%CARMEL HIGH SCHOOL: $7k → 5%BROWNSBURG COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION: $7k → 5%WARRICK COUNTY SCHOOL CORPORATION: $9k → 7%WHITELAND COMMUNITY HIGH SCHOOL: $6k → 8%JASPER HIGH SCHOOL: $7k → 8%MOUNT VERNON HIGH SCHOOL: $7k → 10%WASHINGTON HIGH SCHOOL: $13k → 11%PIKE CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL: $7k → 12%EVANSVILLE VANDERBURGH SCHOOL CORPORATON: $12k → 15%METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF WARREN TOWNSHIP: $6k → 16%461 BOOSTERS: $9k → 19%FIRST: $125k → 7%CARMEL HIGH SCHOOL: $6k → 5%WARRICK COUNTY SCHOOL CORPORATION: $6k → 7%RED ALERT ROBOTICS: $7k → 8%JASPER HIGH SCHOOL: $6k → 8%WASHINGTON COMMUNITY SCHOOLS: $6k → 11%BOSSE HIGH SCHOOL: $7k → 15%MSD OF PIKE TOWNSHIP: $7k → 16%FIRST: $103k → 7%WARRICK COUNTY SCHOOL CORPORATION: $5k → 7%GREATER JASPER CONSOLIDATED SCHOOLS: $5k → 8%MSD OF PIKE TOWNSHIP: $7k → 16%FIRST: $92k → 7%CASTLE HIGH SCHOOL: $7k → 7%PERRY TOWNSHIP SCHOOLS: $24k → 16%FIRST: $90k → 7%PERRY TOWNSHIP SCHOOLS: $17k → 16%FIRST: $35k → 7%PERRY TOWNSHIP SCHOOLS (PERRY MERIDIAN & SOUTHPORT HIGH SCHOOL): $17k → 16%FOR INSPIRATION AND RECOGNITION OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (FIRST): $19k → 7%PURDUE POLYTECHNIC HIGH SCHOOL: $6k → 16%FOR INSPIRATION AND RECOGNITION OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (FIRST): $8k → 7%MSD OF LAWRENCE TOWNSHIP: $8k → 16%FIRST HQ: $5k → 7%MSD OF LAWRENCE TOWNSHIP: $6k → 16%MSD OF LAWRENCE TOWNSHIP: $6k → 16%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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$667k · 9 repeat orgs$61k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
5

Total granted

$667k
$32k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+10%
+163%

Still filing today

11%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 65% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $29k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationScience & TechOther
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

  • FI
    For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology
    8× · 2018–2025 · $477k · revenue +10%
  • PT
    PERRY TOWNSHIP SCHOOLS
    3× · 2017–2019 · $58k
  • ES
    EVANSVILLE-VANDERBURGH SCHOOL CORP
    3× · 2019–2025 · $30k

Funded once

  • RA
    RED ALERT ROBOTICS PARENT ORGANIZATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $7k · revenue +63%
  • BC
    Brownsburg Community Schools
    one grant, 2017 · $7k
  • MO
    MSD OF WARREN TOWNSHIP
    one grant, 2019 · $6k
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
04the grantee network

4 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 4 of the 18 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
4/4
Grantees still filing
3/4
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology (FIRST): $476,799 · Science & TechFor Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology (FIRST)PERRY TOWNSHIP SCHOOLS: $57,745 · OtherPERRY TOWNSHIP SCHOOLSEVANSVILLE-VANDERBURGH SCHOOL CORP: $29,500 · OtherEVANSVILLE-VANDERBURGH SCHOOL CORPMSD OF LAWRENCE TOWNSHIP: $20,174 · OtherMSD OF LAWRENCE TOWNSHIPWARRICK COUNTY SCHOOL CORPORATION: $19,550 · OtherWARRICK COUNTY SCHOOL CORPORATIONWASHINGTON COMMUNITY SCHOOLS: $19,000 · OtherWASHINGTON COMMUNITY SCHOOLSGREATER JASPER CONSOLIDATED SCHOOLS: $17,598 · OtherGREATER JASPER CONSOLIDATED SCHOOLSMSD OF PIKE TOWNSHIP: $13,820 · OtherMSD OF PIKE TOWNSHIPCARMEL CLAY SCHOOL CORPORATION: $13,300 · OtherCARMEL CLAY SCHOOL CORPORATION+6 more: $38,800 · Other+6 more461 BOOSTERS FIRST: $9,495 · EducationRED ALERT ROBOTICS PARENT ORGANIZATION: $7,019 · EducationPURDUE POLYTECHNIC HIGH SCHOOL OF INDIANAPOLIS INC: $6,000 · Education
Science & Tech$476,799Other$229,487Education$22,514

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFor Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology (FIRST): $476,799 over 8y, 0.2% of budget461 BOOSTERS FIRST: $9,495 over 1y, 5.9% of budgetRED ALERT ROBOTICS PARENT ORGANIZATION: $7,019 over 1y, 7.3% of budgetPURDUE POLYTECHNIC HIGH SCHOOL OF INDIANAPOLIS INC: $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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 For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology (FIRST) ↗
  • Who funds 461 BOOSTERS FIRST ↗
  • Who funds RED ALERT ROBOTICS PARENT ORGANIZATION ↗
  • Who funds PURDUE POLYTECHNIC HIGH SCHOOL OF INDIANAPOLIS 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.

For Inspiration and R…Project Lead the Way …Project Lead the Way …Early Learning Indian…Lilly Endowment IncTeachers Treasures IncRichard M Fairbanks F…University of Indiana…Forum Credit Union Fo…Gpd Group Employees F…Community Foundation …United Way of Central…
For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology (FIRST)NH35.2× affinity16 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology (FIRST) · Project Lead the Way Inc · Project Lead the Way Inc · Early Learning Indiana Inc · Lilly Endowment Inc · Teachers Treasures Inc · Richard M Fairbanks Foundation Inc · University of Indianapolis · Forum Credit Union Foundation Inc · Gpd Group Employees Foundation Inc · Community Foundation Alliance Inc · United Way of Central Indiana Inc

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 Indianafirst Inc First Indiana Robotics funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Indianafirst Inc First Indiana Robotics. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 18 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Indianafirst Inc First Indiana Robotics’ 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