Skip to content
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

Arizona · Public charity

Institute for Digital Progress

To help local governments plan develop and implement smart city technology solutions that create better services and improve the quality of life for citizens of the Greater Phoenix Region.

$25k
Granted FY2019
1
Grants FY2019
1
Organizations funded FY2019
Read the full brief
Median grant, FY2019
$25,000
Largest grant, FY2019
$25,000
States reached, FY2019
1
Total assets, FY2019
$6k

Top grantees

Largest recipients by total granted, FY2019 to FY2019, and the share of each one’s budget the grants supplied at peak.

GranteeTotal grantedYearsShare of their budget
City of Scottsdale$25,0001n/a

Compare Institute for Digital Progress with peer funders

About Institute for Digital Progress

How much does Institute for Digital Progress give?
Institute for Digital Progress reported 1 grants totaling $25,000 in its FY2019 IRS filing.
What does Institute for Digital Progress fund?
By grant dollars over FY2019 to FY2019, its largest causes are Public Benefit (100%).
Who are Institute for Digital Progress's largest grantees?
By total granted over FY2019 to FY2019: City of Scottsdale ($25k).
Where is Institute for Digital Progress based?
Institute for Digital Progress is based in AZ.

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 1 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 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2021) is on record and reports $13k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2019, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Institute for Digital Progress’ 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