Skip to content
Investment Casting Institute at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Investment Casting Institute

See schedule othe INVESTMENT CASTING INSTITUTE will market the investment casting industry and support its members by facilitating professional, academic, educational, and technical interest, and will provide a forum for advancement in technology and product quality for customers and manufacturers, while promoting free trade, fair…

$692k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$204k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through 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, FY2023 to 2025.

Public Benefit$630kScience & Tech$535kEnvironment$178kEducation$28kInternational$6k
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $9k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $119k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $552k
$77,525
Median grant
8
States reached
$1.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MISSOURI UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY$203,531
UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA$93,822
TETHON CORPORATION$89,935
CONCURRENT RESOURCES LLC$87,050
PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT & ANALYSIS LLC$77,525
RANGEVIEW INC$45,136
FOUNDRY SUPPORT OPERATIONS LLC$41,255
INTREPID AUTOMATION$22,212
ALFRED UNIVERSITY$10,409
SHELLCAST INC$9,061
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 (FY23–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 68% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA: $94k → 15%TETHON CORPORATION: $90k → 12%INTREPID AUTOMATION: $22k → 11%RANGEVIEW INC: $210k → 14%ALFRED UNIVERSITY: $17k → 19%BARRON INDUSTRIES: $14k → 8%SHELLCAST INC: $19k → 15%MISSOURI UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY: $204k → 16%METALTEK INTERNATIONAL: $6k → 8%BESCAST INC: $6k → 9%PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT & ANALYSIS LLC: $90k → 7%CONCURRENT RESOURCES LLC: $87k → 9%UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA: $12k → 15%TETHON CORPORATION: $58k → 12%INTREPID AUTOMATION: $9k → 11%RANGEVIEW INC: $45k → 14%ALFRED UNIVERSITY: $10k → 19%SHELLCAST INC: $9k → 15%MISSOURI UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY: $133k → 16%FOUNDRY SUPPORT OPERATIONS LLC: $41k → 9%PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT & ANALYSIS LLC: $78k → 7%CONCURRENT RESOURCES LLC: $83k → 9%FOUNDRY SUPPORT OPERATIONS LLC: $32k → 9%CONCURRENT RESOURCES LLC: $8k → 9%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.

Which US states its grants reach

NH
IL
WI
MI
NY
OH
CA
NE
MO
AZ
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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.4M · 10 repeat orgs$25k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 10 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
3

Total granted

$1.4M
$25k

Still filing today

10%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’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

  • CO
    CURATORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI
    2× · 2024–2025 · $337k
  • RI
    RANGEVIEW INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $255k
  • CR
    CONCURRENT RESOURCES LLC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $178k

Funded once

  • BI
    BARRON INDUSTRIES
    one grant, 2024 · $14k
  • BI
    BESCAST INC
    one grant, 2024 · $6k
  • MI
    METALTEK INTERNATIONAL
    one grant, 2024 · $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

1 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. 1 of the 13 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)
1/1
Grantees still filing
0/1
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CURATORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI: $336,689 · OtherCURATORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURIRANGEVIEW INC: $255,220 · OtherRANGEVIEW INCCONCURRENT RESOURCES LLC: $177,966 · OtherCONCURRENT RESOURCES LLCProduct Development & Analysis LLC: $167,625 · OtherProduct Development & Analysis LLCTETHON CORPORATION: $147,835 · OtherTETHON CORPORATIONUNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA: $105,670 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF ARIZONAFOUNDRY SUPPORT OPERATIONS LLC: $73,365 · OtherFOUNDRY SUPPORT OPERATIONS LLC+5 more: $84,099 · Other+5 moreALFRED UNIVERSITY: $27,610 · Education
Other$1,348,469Education$27,610

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 budgetALFRED UNIVERSITY: $27,610 over 2y, 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 ALFRED UNIVERSITY ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Investment Casting Institute funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Investment Casting Institute. 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%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Investment Casting Institute?

    Find your warmest path to Investment Casting Institute 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 13 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 Investment Casting Institute’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