Skip to content
Innovative Quality Schools at a glance

· Public charity

Innovative Quality Schools

Please see the mission and vision of INNOVATIVE QUALITY SCHOOLS (iqs) as previously stated.

$15k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Education$130k
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $5,250, the rows itemized in this filing. The $15,250 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $10,000 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.
$5,250
Median grant
1
States reached
$436k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BDOTE LEARNING CENTER$5,250
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 (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%Minnesota Excellence in Learning Academy: $24k → 11%Level Up Academy: $10k → 14%Minnesota Excellence in Learning Academy: $10k → 11%The Journey School: $10k → 14%Minnesota Excellence in Learning Academy: $10k → 11%St Paul City School: $7k → 14%Progeny Academy: $9k → 11%Notre Ecole: $5k → 11%Bdote Learning Center: $13k → 11%Bdote Learning Center: $7k → 11%BDOTE LEARNING CENTER: $5k → 11%Nasha Shkola: $5k → 11%BlueSky Charter School: $6k → 11%Success Academy: $10k → 11%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 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
Math & Science Academy

We provide accelerated curricula in all subjects with an emphasis on math and science.

Education
2
Minnesota Transitions Charter School

We are a student-centered learning community that inspires and supports all learners to achieve excellence through equitable, relevant learning experiences.

Education
3
Phoenix Academy

The phoenix academy of art and science school program has been developed on research- backed foundational teaching and learning practices and with the intent of offering a curriculum that is more experiential and personally appealing to…

Education
4
Stonebridge World School

Our mission is to create and environment with a global perspective that prepares students to excel academically. Our vision is to develop motivated and principled global citizens for lifelong learning and productive citizenship.

Education
5
Aspen Academy

To provide students with a well-rounded and core knowledge-based education.

Education
6
The World Learner School of Chaska

The World Learner School's mission is to create a school that supports an experiential collaborative learning (Montessori) program that empowers children to unfold their full potential as whole and unique persons in classroom, local and…

Housing & Shelter
7
New Millennium Academy

The new millennium academy (nma) community prepares learners for life, engages them in high academic achievement, and fosters hmong cultural pride and identity.

Education
8
Woodbury Leadership Academy

The mission of wla is to utilize leadership based programs and strategies grounded in solid research, combined with the demonstrated success of core knowledge curriculum as the basis of a rigorous overall educational program that builds…

Education
9
Yinghua Academy

The mission of yinghua academy is to provide a challenging and comprehensive learning environment that will nurture the students' natural inquisitiveness and will prepare them to be engaged and productive global citizens.

Education
10
Arcadia Charter School

It is the mission of arcadia charter school to prepare our students to transition intellectually, emotionally, and ethically to higher education, future employment, and engaged citizenship.

Education
11
Rivers Edge Academy

The mission of rivers edge academy is, in partnership with parents and community, to prepare urban high school students for their further education and career with rigorous academics, innovative projects and an interdisciplinary…

—
12
Nova Classical Academy

Offering a rigorous, through, systematic, and challenging classical education to K-12 students.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Minnesota Excellence in Learning Academy; the most unlike its peers is Progeny Academy Inc. 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

10 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
9/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MINNESOTA EXCELLENCE IN LEARNING ACADEMY: $43,653 · EducationMINNESOTA EXCELLENCE IN LEARNING ACADEMYBDOTE LEARNING CENTER: $25,249 · EducationBDOTE LEARNING CENTERSUCCESS ACADEMY: $10,000 · EducationSUCCESS ACADEMYLEVEL UP ACADEMY: $10,000 · EducationLEVEL UP ACADEMYTHE JOURNEY SCHOOLS INC: $10,000 · EducationTHE JOURNEY SCHOOLS INCPROGENY ACADEMY INC: $8,542 · EducationPROGENY ACADEMY INCST PAUL CITY SCHOOL: $6,729 · EducationST PAUL CITY SCHOOLBLUESKY CHARTER SCHOOL: $5,500 · EducationNasha Shkola: $5,413 · EducationNotre Ecole French Immersion School: $5,100 · Other
Education$125,086Other$5,100

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMINNESOTA EXCELLENCE IN LEARNING ACADEMY: $43,653 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetBDOTE LEARNING CENTER: $25,249 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetSUCCESS ACADEMY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetLEVEL UP ACADEMY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE JOURNEY SCHOOLS INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetPROGENY ACADEMY INC: $8,542 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetST PAUL CITY SCHOOL: $6,729 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBLUESKY CHARTER SCHOOL: $5,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNasha Shkola: $5,413 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetNotre Ecole French Immersion School: $5,100 over 1y, 0.7% 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.

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.

Amazonsmile Foundation
Amazonsmile FoundationWA2.7× affinity9 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Amazonsmile 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 Innovative Quality Schools funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Innovative Quality Schools. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Innovative Quality Schools?

    Find your warmest path to Innovative Quality Schools 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 10 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 Innovative Quality Schools’ 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