Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersAlso receives grants — funding profile →
Plinth

· Public charity

Missouri Technology Corporation

The mission of the mtc is to provide leadership and make strategic investments that help entrepreneurs create and grow technology-based missouri businesses.

$16M
Granted FY2025still arriving
24
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$8.3M
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.

Community Improvement$32MScience & Tech$5.2MEducation$2.0MArts & Culture$1.6MFood & Nutrition$1.6MCrime & Legal$495kEmployment$450kEnvironment$381kOther$0
02FY2025 · 24 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $39k
  • $50k–250k10 grants · $1.6M
  • $250k+13 grants · $15M
$250,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$105M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
IGNITE MO LOAN PARTICIPATION PROGRAM LLC$8,312,046
BIOSTL$1,499,514
BIONEXUS KC$936,050
MISSOURI ENTERPRISE$750,000
MISSOURI INNOVATION CENTER$600,000
MISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY$500,000
BIOSTL$400,000
MISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY$380,500
DOWNTOWN KC (LAUNCH KC)$327,000
CODEFI FOUNDATION INC$325,000
UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI - KANSAS CITY$250,000
CODEFI FOUNDATION INC$250,000
TECHSTL$250,000
MISSOURI INNOVATION CENTER$200,000
CODEFI FOUNDATION INC$200,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY25–25, $120k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%THE PORTER HOUSE KC (CHES INC): $120k → 15%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 10% of Missouri Technology Corporation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.

Missouri Technology Corporationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

66%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$29M · 23 repeat orgs$15M to everyone else

23 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

23
11

Total granted

$29M
$4.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+2%
+36%

Still filing today

74%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 37% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10M went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’22’25
Community ImprovementEducationScience & TechEnvironmentHuman ServicesEmploymentOther

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

  • MI
    MISSOURI INCUTECH FOUNDATION
    9× · 2017–2025 · $4.3M · revenue +8%
  • B
    BIOSTL
    5× · 2017–2025 · $2.6M · revenue +445%
  • CF
    CODEFI FOUNDATION ON RURAL INNOVATION
    8× · 2017–2025 · $1.8M · revenue +385% · 44% of their budget

Funded once

  • CI
    CAPITAL INNOVATORS ACCELERATOR LLC
    one grant, 2021 · $1.9M
  • MS
    MISSOURI SOYBEAN ASSOCIATION
    one grant, 2017 · $1.6M · revenue -10% · 27% of their budget
  • S
    STLVENTUREWORKS
    one grant, 2018 · $300k · revenue +22%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
St Louis Economic Development Partnership

Economic development.

—
2
Missouri Cybersecurity Center of Excellence - Mccoe

Accelerating the springfield, mo cyber economy and positioning it as a state hub of cyber innovation.

Community Improvement
3
Small Business Empowerment Center

The Small Business Empowerment Center (SBEC) is uniquely qualified to assist small businesses in the distressed areas of St. Louis County and St. Louis City. For 15 years the SBEC has worked in the Empowerment Zone (EZ) to help residents…

Community Improvement
4
Missouri Technology Corporation

The mission of the mtc is to provide leadership and make strategic investments that help entrepreneurs create and grow technology-based missouri businesses.

—
5
Greater St Louis Inc

Greater st. louis, inc. brings together business and civic leaders to create jobs, drive inclusive economic growth, and increase the st. louis metro area's global competitiveness. we speak with a unified voice, lead with a bold agenda, and…

Community Improvement
6
St Louis Regional Economic Development Alliance

Alliance stl is the business attraction initiative of greater st. louis, inc. greater st. louis, inc. is a nonprofit investor-supported organization comprised of businesses, institutions and organizations of all sizes that reflect the full…

—
7
Small Business Empowerment Fund Cdfi

A community development financial institution or community development finance institution - abbreviated in both cases to CDFI - is a financial institution that provides credit and financial services to underserved markets and populations,…

Community Improvement
8
Innovation Connector Inc

To be east central indiana's primary sponsor bringing in technological firms.

Community Improvement
9
Enterprise Institute

To support and enhance educational, commercialization, research and business development opportunities for faculty and students at educational institutions within the state of South Dakota in partnership with industry by facilitating…

Education
10
St Charles County Economic Development Council

To help build a stronger, thriving, and self-supporting economy for st. charles county.

—
11
Missouri Partnership

In its role as the principal business recruitment and marketing organization for missouri, the missouri partnership attracts new jobs and business investments to the state through collaborative efforts with other state and local economic…

Community Improvement
12
Venture Cafe St Louis

Venture Café is working to build stronger and more inclusive innovation ecosystems and accelerate and enhance the innovation process. It does this through its use of programming, space, storytelling, and broad innovation engagement.

Community Improvement

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Entrepreneur Startup Business Development Corporation and the most unlike its peers is Bionexus Kc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 23 years old; the field is 21. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number20%15%<5yr13%9%5–10yr16%18%10–20yr15%38%20–35yr14%15%35–55yr22%6%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value20%4%<5yr13%16%5–10yr16%24%10–20yr15%24%20–35yr14%24%35–55yr22%9%55yr+

The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 15% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
2%1/49
the rest of the field
14%
2,860/20,705

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

05the grantee network

40 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. 40 of the 41 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.

11
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
34/40
Grantees still filing
19/40
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

IGNITE MO LOAN PARTICIPATION PROGRAM LLC — $8,312,046 · OtherIGNITE MO LOAN PARTICIPATION PROGRAM LLCCURATORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI — $3,475,834 · OtherCURATORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURIMISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY — $3,096,527 · OtherMISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITYMISSOURI INNOVATION CENTER INC — $2,797,322 · OtherMISSOURI INNOVATION CENTER INCCENTER FOR EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES — $2,550,908 · OtherCENTER FOR EMERGING TECHNOLOGIESCAPITAL INNOVATORS ACCELERATOR LLC — $1,875,230 · OtherCAPITAL INNOVATORS ACCELERATOR LLCMISSOURI SOYBEAN ASSOCIATION — $1,552,000 · OtherMISSOURI SOYBEAN ASSOCIATIONTHE DOWNTOWN COUNCIL — $1,409,938 · OtherBRUSH CREEK ENTERPRISE CENTER INC — $1,305,550 · Other+8 more — $1,461,123 · OtherMISSOURI INCUTECH FOUNDATION — $4,257,287 · Community ImprovementMISSOURI INCUTECH FOUN…CODEFI FOUNDATION ON RURAL INNOVATION — $1,820,248 · Community ImprovementCODEFI FOUNDATION ON R…ENTREPRENEUR STARTUP BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION — $897,500 · Community ImprovementENTREPRENEUR STARTUP B…TECHNOLOGY ENTREPRENEUR CENTER INC — $616,500 · Community ImprovementTECHNOLOGY ENTREPRENEU…TECHSTL — $375,000 · Community ImprovementMISSOURI RURAL ENTERPRISE AND INNOVATION CENTER — $301,909 · Community Improvement+4 more — $425,674 · Community ImprovementBIOSTL — $2,647,889 · EducationBIOSTLJOPLIN AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOUNDATION — $914,870 · EducationJOPLIN AREA …THE LAUNCHCODE FOUNDATION — $450,000 · EducationTHE LAUNCHCO…THE INSTITUTE FOR INDUSTRIAL & APPLIED LIFE SCIENC — $326,562 · EducationTHE INSTITUT…THE LEAN LAB INC LEAN LAB EDUCATION — $255,000 · Education+2 more — $225,616 · EducationBIONEXUS KC — $1,061,050 · Science & TechBIOGENERATOR — $446,350 · Science & TechDONALD DANFORTH PLANT SCIENCE CENTER — $215,000 · Science & TechTHE SMALL BUSINESS SYNERGY CORPORATION — $338,000 · EmploymentMercy Health — $225,000 · HealthDOWNTOWN WEST PLAINS INC — $125,500 · EnvironmentCREDIT & HOMEOWNERSHIP EMPOWERMENT SERVICES — $120,000 · Human Services
Other$27,836,478Community Improvement$8,694,118Education$4,819,937Science & Tech$1,722,400Employment$338,000Health$225,000Environment$125,500Human Services$120,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetMISSOURI INCUTECH FOUNDATION — $4,257,287 over 9y, 23% of budgetMISSOURI INNOVATION CENTER INC — $2,797,322 over 9y, 58% of budgetBIOSTL — $2,647,889 over 5y, 18% of budgetCENTER FOR EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES — $2,550,908 over 7y, 20% of budgetCODEFI FOUNDATION ON RURAL INNOVATION — $1,820,248 over 8y, 44% of budgetMISSOURI SOYBEAN ASSOCIATION — $1,552,000 over 1y, 27% of budgetTHE DOWNTOWN COUNCIL — $1,409,938 over 5y, 32% of budgetBRUSH CREEK ENTERPRISE CENTER INC — $1,305,550 over 7y, 100% of budgetJOPLIN AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOUNDATION — $914,870 over 8y, 25% of budgetENTREPRENEUR STARTUP BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION — $897,500 over 5y, 25% of budgetTECHNOLOGY ENTREPRENEUR CENTER INC — $616,500 over 4y, 7.5% of budgetTHE LAUNCHCODE FOUNDATION — $450,000 over 4y, 3.7% of budgetBIOGENERATOR — $446,350 over 2y, 3.2% of budgetITEN — $441,000 over 2y, 55% of budgetTHE SMALL BUSINESS SYNERGY CORPORATION — $338,000 over 2y, 30% of budgetTHE INSTITUTE FOR INDUSTRIAL & APPLIED LIFE SCIENC — $326,562 over 7y, 7.9% of budgetMISSOURI RURAL ENTERPRISE AND INNOVATION CENTER — $301,909 over 7y, 96% of budgetSTLVENTUREWORKS — $300,000 over 1y, 21% of budgetBRAZEN ST LOUIS — $265,000 over 2y, 50% of budgetTHE LEAN LAB INC LEAN LAB EDUCATION — $255,000 over 3y, 13% of budgetMercy Health — $225,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetDONALD DANFORTH PLANT SCIENCE CENTER — $215,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetKC Social Innovation Center Inc — $200,000 over 1y, 52% of budgetWEPOWER — $198,174 over 1y, 11% of budgetMISSOURI INNOVATION CORPORATION — $150,616 over 5y, 65% of budgetDOWNTOWN WEST PLAINS INC — $125,500 over 1y, 16% of budgetCREDIT & HOMEOWNERSHIP EMPOWERMENT SERVICES — $120,000 over 2y, 3.4% of budgetLINDENWOOD EDUCATION SYSTEM — $75,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetFULTON AREA DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION — $25,000 over 1y, 23% of budgetKANSAS CITY AREA DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL — $22,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetGLOBALHACK INC — $10,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetST LOUIS REGIONAL CHAMBER & GROWTH ASSOCIATION — $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
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.

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 tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Ewing Marion Kauffman…William T Kemper Foun…Washington UniversityCommerce Bancshares F…St Louis Community Fo…World Wide Technology…James S McDonnell Fou…Berges Family Foundat…Community Foundation …Enterprise Holdings F…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…Charities Aid Foundat…
Ewing Marion Kauffman FoundationMO22.8× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation · William T Kemper Foundation Commerce Bank Trustee · Washington University · Commerce Bancshares Foundation · St Louis Community Foundation Inc · World Wide Technology Foundation · James S McDonnell Foundation · Berges Family Foundation · Community Foundation of the Ozarks Inc · Enterprise Holdings Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America

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 Missouri Technology Corporation 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    15report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY20–25

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 41 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    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