Skip to content

· Public charity

Medtech Innovator

MEDTECH INNOVATOR organizes and runs a global competition and virtual accelerator for medical device, digital health, and diagnostic startup companies.

$1.1M
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$350k
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, FY2018 to 2025.

Health$3.4MScience & Tech$995kArts & Culture$45k
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 10 grants below total $545,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,060,000 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $515,000 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.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k9 grants · $195k
  • $250k+1 grant · $350k
$25,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$8.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SAMAY$350,000
BRAINSPACE$25,000
SOMNICS HEALTH$25,000
OZLO (DROWSY DIGITAL INC)$25,000
NEUROBIONICS$25,000
FLOW MEDICAL SOLUTIONS INC$25,000
JUNIPER MEDICAL$25,000
ARSENAL MEDICAL INC$25,000
OZLO (DROWSY DIGITAL INC)$10,000
SANAHEAL INC$10,000
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 (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 80% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%MACHINE BIO: $200k → 11%OZLO (DROWSY DIGITAL INC): $25k → 11%ARSENAL MEDICAL INC: $25k → 8%SANAHEAL INC: $10k → 16%REELREACTOR INC: $10k → 8%FOREST DEVICES: $350k → 11%AVISI TECHNOLOGIES INC: $10k → 22%SOMNICS HEALTH: $25k → 7%SAMAY: $350k → 8%IFPX MEDICAL: $25k → 10%AOPIA BIOSCIENCES INC: $10k → 10%KOYA INC: $25k → 10%COOLER HEADS CARE: $25k → 11%REALSEQ BIOSCIENCES: $10k → 13%STROKEDX: $350k → 14%SAFEBEAT: $13k → 18%NANOWEAR: $15k → 20%MICROTRANSPONDER: $200k → 10%ALLOTROPE MEDICAL: $50k → 16%EVREN TECHNOLOGIES: $10k → 19%CLARA BIOTECH: $15k → 15%ALVA HEALTH: $350k → 12%EPICYPHER: $10k → 11%ANDSON BIOTECH INC: $10k → 13%SANA HEALTH: $350k → 12%ALYVE MEDICAL INC: $25k → 12%NEURAVA INC: $25k → 19%BRAINSPACE: $25k → 9%INTERMED LABS LLC: $25k → 19%CARDIEX USA (ATCOR MEDICAL): $25k → 7%FLOW MEDICAL SOLUTIONS INC: $25k → 14%PHOTONI CARE: $15k → 19%CARETAKER MEDICAL: $25k → 8%LIMAX BIOSCIENCES: $38k → 8%PROJECT MORAY INC: $25k → 7%VENA VITALS: $15k → 10%ABREOS BIOSCIENCES: $25k → 11%STROKEDX: $11k → 14%PATH EX: $35k → 16%IMMERSIVETOUCH: $35k → 14%NEUROBIONICS: $25k → 8%DAY ZERO DIAGNOSTICS: $350k → 16%LIEF THERAPEUTICS: $35k → 10%SPECT: $25k → 14%RHAEOS: $350k → 14%PHIEX TECHNOLOGIES: $350k → 16%GENNEXT TECHNOLOGIES: $250k → 7%PHIEX TECHNOLOGIES: $11k → 16%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

WA
ID
IL
NY
MA
IN
PA
NJ
CT
CA
CO
WV
VA
MD
DE
AZ
KS
NC
GA
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region: $210k on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$210k · 100% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: PRIZE MONEY FOR MEDICAL INNOVATION

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

18%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$771k · 4 repeat orgs$3.6M to everyone else

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
44

Total granted

$771k
$3.1M

Still filing today

0%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 5% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $520k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
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

  • PT
    PHIEX TECHNOLOGIES
    2× · 2022–2023 · $361k
  • S
    STROKEDX
    2× · 2023–2024 · $361k
  • N
    NEUROBIONICS
    2× · 2024–2025 · $34k

Funded once

  • AH
    ALVA HEALTH
    one grant, 2022 · $350k
  • DZ
    Day Zero Diagnostics Inc
    one grant, 2018 · $350k
  • SH
    SANA HEALTH
    one grant, 2019 · $350k
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, 2018–2025.

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

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2018 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 0 of the 56 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

PHIEX TECHNOLOGIES: $361,000 · OtherPHIEX TECHNOLOGIESSTROKEDX: $360,500 · OtherSTROKEDXALVA HEALTH: $350,000 · OtherALVA HEALTHDay Zero Diagnostics Inc: $350,000 · OtherDay Zero Diagnostics IncSANA HEALTH: $350,000 · OtherSANA HEALTHRHAEOS: $350,000 · OtherRHAEOSSAMAY: $350,000 · OtherSAMAYFOREST DEVICES: $350,000 · OtherFOREST DEVICESGENNEXT TECHNOLOGIES: $250,000 · OtherGENNEXT TECHNOLOGIESMACHINE BIO: $200,000 · OtherMICROTRANSPONDER: $200,000 · Other+45 more: $920,000 · Other+45 more
Other$4,391,500

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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Medtech Innovator?

Find your warmest path to Medtech Innovator 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 56 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 Medtech Innovator’s filings →

More from the funding graph