Skip to content

· Public charity

Innovation Fund America Inc

Innovation fund america is a nonprofit partnering with community colleges to accelerate the growth of technology startups through early-stage funding and education.

$1.7M
Granted FY2025still arriving
16
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$150k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Community Improvement$3.0MHealth$1.5MScience & Tech$1.2MRecreation & Sports$150kFood & Nutrition$100kEducation$100kAnimals$50kEmployment$25k
02FY2025 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$140,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$68k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NEOINDICATE LLC$150,000
BOWERBAGS LLC$150,000
SYMPHONY ROBOTICS$150,000
COURTESY CUPS LLC$150,000
BAILOUT SYSTEMS INC$150,000
LOGICALLY ENGINEERED AUTOMATION FEATURES LTD$150,000
MIC MONITOR LLC -DBA CORROLYTICS$150,000
SENSATE BIOSYSTEMS$140,000
CYNGUSMED INC$140,000
LIGHTHANDED ENTERPRISES LLC$75,000
HOVN LLC$60,000
AVAYLA SOLUTIONS - DBA BLAZEBITE$50,000
TRITONX INC$50,000
ARMADILLO PROTECTION LLC$50,000
SCOPE MEDICAL INC$50,000
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 (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 92% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%TRUE CONCEPTS MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES LLC: $150k → 6%SCOPE MEDICAL INC: $50k → 7%ZCATH MANUFACTURING INC: $100k → 13%NEOINDICATE LLC: $150k → 13%NEEZ21 INC: $50k → 13%AUXILIUM HEALTH INC: $50k → 13%RH2 LLC: $50k → 14%ARMADILLO PROTECTION LLC: $50k → 15%MY HOME PARK INC: $150k → 17%AEIOU SCIENTIFIC LLC: $100k → 22%RANCH HAND INC: $80k → 5%CONTENT STATUS LLC: $150k → 9%HOVN LLC: $60k → 13%NEOINDICATE LLC: $150k → 13%COURTESY CUPS LLC: $150k → 13%BOWERBAGS LLC: $150k → 14%COAG CO LLC: $100k → 17%LOGICALLY ENGINEERED AUTOMATION FEATURES LTD: $150k → 13%SENSATE BIOSYSTEMS: $140k → 13%ON DEMAND CARE CORP: $75k → 17%JUGGERBOT 3D LLC: $55k → 19%SYMPHONY ROBOTICS: $150k → 17%TRANCE MEDICAL LLC: $50k → 19%MIC MONITOR LLC DBA CORROLYTICS: $150k → 13%MIC MONITOR LLC -DBA CORROLYTICS: $150k → 13%WHAT'S NEXT ED CORPORATION: $100k → 13%HYR MEDICAL INC: $71k → 17%ROOSENSE LLC: $100k → 13%MIC MONITOR LLC DBA CORROLYTICS: $50k → 13%BAILOUT SYSTEMS INC: $150k → 17%CAVALRY TRANSPORT LLC: $50k → 17%DEEPHIRE LLC: $50k → 13%NOTUS LABS INC: $150k → 17%ZSENSE SYSTEMS LLC: $50k → 13%CYNGUSMED INC: $140k → 13%PROJITECH LLC: $65k → 17%INCAEDIUM INITIATIVE CORPORATION: $150k → 17%CYANICSOFT INC: $63k → 17%TIME2TALK INC: $100k → 17%FARM FAIR LLC: $80k → 17%OCTET SCIENTIFIC INC: $150k → 17%CARE BLOOM LLC: $150k → 17%OCTET SCIENTIFIC INC: $100k → 17%NELSON INNOVATIONS: $75k → 17%PRIMA MEDICAL INC: $150k → 17%ANEMED INC: $150k → 17%NEVERENDING INC: $100k → 17%LIGHTHANDED ENTERPRISES LLC: $75k → 17%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.

38%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.3M · 19 repeat orgs$3.8M to everyone else

19 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 12 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
38

Total granted

$2.3M
$2.6M

Still filing today

0%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 31% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.2M went to new ones.

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

  • MM
    MIC MONITOR LLC -DBA CORROLYTICS
    3× · 2023–2025 · $350k
  • NL
    NEOINDICATE LLC
    2× · 2023–2025 · $300k
  • OS
    OCTET SCIENTIFIC INC
    3× · 2020–2023 · $260k

Funded once

  • NL
    NOTUS LABS INC
    one grant, 2024 · $150k
  • PM
    PRIMA MEDICAL INC
    one grant, 2024 · $150k
  • MH
    MY HOME PARK INC
    one grant, 2023 · $150k
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

0 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2020–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2020 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 0 of the 69 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
0/0
Grantees still filing
0/0
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MIC MONITOR LLC -DBA CORROLYTICS: $350,000 · OtherMIC MONITOR LLC -DBA CORROLYTICSNEOINDICATE LLC: $300,000 · OtherOCTET SCIENTIFIC INC: $260,000 · Other+66 more: $5,205,789 · Other+66 more
Other$6,115,789

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

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their 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.

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Lorain County Community College FoundationOH17.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Lorain County Community College 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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Innovation Fund America Inc?

Find your warmest path to Innovation Fund America Inc 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 69 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 Innovation Fund America’s filings →

More from the funding graph