· Public charity
MATHCOUNTS Foundation
MATHCOUNTS provides engaging math programs for US middle school students of all ability levels to build confidence and improve attitudes towards math and problem solving.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 16 grants below total $152,212 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $351,816 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $199,604 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k10 grants · $64k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $88k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| California Soc of Prof Eng Edu Fdtn | $28,754 |
| Florida Engineering Foundation | $14,494 |
| Pennsylvania Engineering Foundation | $11,834 |
| New Jersey Soc Of Prof Engineers | $11,146 |
| Texas Engineering Foundation | $10,950 |
| Engineers Foundation of Ohio | $10,916 |
| Foundation for Engineering Education Inc | $8,382 |
| Prof Eng of North Carolina Edu Fndtn | $8,336 |
| Maryland Soc of Prof Eng Edu Fdtn | $8,258 |
| Illinois Engineering Initiative | $6,588 |
| Minnesota MATHCOUNTS | $6,138 |
| Michigan Engineers Foundation | $5,544 |
| Kentucky Society of Professional Engineers | $5,346 |
| Georgia MATHCOUNTS Foundation | $5,318 |
| NSPE-CO Education Foundation | $5,144 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 80% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
13 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $24k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- FEFLORIDA ENGINEERING FOUNDATION INC9× · 2017–2025 · $97k · revenue +202%
- EFENGINEERS FOUNDATION OF OHIO9× · 2017–2025 · $68k · revenue +42%
- IEILLINOIS ENGINEERING INITIATIVE9× · 2017–2025 · $66k · revenue +32%
Funded once
- MMMATHCOUNTS MANHATTAN INCone grant, 2017 · $12k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2018 · $5k
- IEIOWA ENGINEERING FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2017 · $5k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Educational programs.
Encouraging young students in middle high school to enter the engineering field
The Monroe Professional Engineers Society MPES promotes social and economic welfare of the engineering profession develops continuing education opportunities and raises awareness of the profession among our youth
Educational Activity
To further the interest of professional engineeers
To further STEM education in Oklahoma and increase the number of engineering professionals living and working in the state.
Promote civil engineering education
Promotes in sciense, engineering fields
To promote engineering education in alaska, benefit the public by providing educational and charitable activities related to all engineering fields, and build an endowment to support current and future activities.
The kentucky engineering foundation grants scholarships, provides guidance and assists worthy students to obtain instruction and training in engineering and mathematics; instruction of the public and the dissemination of engineering…
Promote the practice of civil engineering.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Professional Engineers of North Carolina Educational Foundation and the most unlike its peers is New Jersey Society of Professional Engineers. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
15 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 15 of the 20 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds California Society of Professional Engineers Educa ↗
- Who funds FLORIDA ENGINEERING FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds PENNSYLVANIA ENGINEERING FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Texas Engineering Foundation ↗
- Who funds ENGINEERS FOUNDATION OF OHIO ↗
- Who funds ILLINOIS ENGINEERING INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds THE FOUNDATION FOR ENGINEERING EDUCATION INC ↗
- Who funds PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS OF NORTH CAROLINA EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NEW JERSEY SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS ↗
- Who funds MINNESOTA SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MICHIGAN ENGINEERS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS COLORADO EDUCATION FDN ↗
- Who funds KENTUCKY SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS INC ↗
- Who funds GEORGIA MATHCOUNTS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MASSACHUSETTS SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS INC ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.
Open a dossier: Amazonsmile Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization MATHCOUNTS Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.