Skip to content

· Public charity

New York City Industrial Technology Assistance Corporation

To strengthen the economy and job base of new york city by improving the competitiveness of local industrial and technology firms.

$125k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$65k
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, FY2021 to 2025.

Science & Tech$194kHealth$80kArts & Culture$65kEducation$30kSocial Science$20kCommunity Improvement$20kEnvironment$10kEmployment$10k
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 5 grants below total $117,690, the rows itemized in this filing. The $125,151 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $7,461 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

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $44k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $65k
$14,450
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NY Embroidery Studio$65,000
GAL Manufacturing Company LLC$20,000
Tempco Glass Fabrication LLC$14,450
Yula Corp$10,000
Arbour Group LLC$8,240
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 (FY21–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 95% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%MTRC The Research Foundation for SUNY: $20k → 7%Marrs Makers: $10k → 13%INSYTE (Insyte Consulting): $10k → 13%TDO (Central NY Technology Devt Org): $10k → 14%NextCorps Inc: $33k → 14%CEG (Center for Economic Growth): $10k → 14%MTECHVTDC: $10k → 14%CABVI: $10k → 16%Airdaptive LLC: $10k → 17%CITEC: $10k → 18%AM&T (Alliance for Manufacturing & Technology: $10k → 20%131co INC: $10k → 20%Yula Corp: $10k → 28%Tratado de Libre Comericio LLC: $10k → 13%NextCorps Inc: $10k → 14%Folia Water Inc: $10k → 17%MYT Works: $10k → 20%Yula Corp: $10k → 28%Tempco Glass Fabrication LLC: $14k → 13%NY Embroidery Studio: $65k → 17%Pvilion Technologies LLC: $25k → 20%Cohesive Robotics: $48k → 28%S by S Studio: $10k → 17%NY Embroidery Studio: $10k → 17%HC Contracting IncFerrara: $10k → 17%Re-Nuble Inc: $5k → 17%Arbour Group LLC: $8k → 17%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.
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.

32%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$138k · 3 repeat orgs$291k to everyone else

3 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
19

Total granted

$138k
$248k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-3%
+14%

Still filing today

33%
37%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 64% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $43k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’24’25
EducationSocial ScienceEmploymentHealthScience & TechOther
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

  • NY
    NEW YORK EMBROIDERY STUDEO
    2× · 2022–2025 · $75k
  • NI
    NEXTCORPS INC
    2× · 2021–2022 · $43k · revenue -3%
  • YC
    Yula Corp
    2× · 2022–2025 · $20k

Funded once

  • CR
    Cohesive Robotics
    one grant, 2024 · $48k
  • PT
    PVILION TECHNOLOGIES LLC
    one grant, 2024 · $25k
  • TR
    The Research Foundation for The State University of New Yorkgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $20k · revenue +36%
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

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Ceg of the Capital Region

Accelerate economic opportunity in albany/ny's capital region by developing and implementing strategies to attract, expand, and create businesses and jobs, and provide catalytic leadership, working with partners and stakeholders to shape a…

Membership Benefit
2
Hudson Valley Technology Development Center Inc
—
3
Alfred Technology Resources Inc

To stimulate economic development in the southern tier region of ny, through support of the creation of innovative business start-ups and the jobs they create. this support is provided through its business incubator facilities and the…

Community Improvement
4
New York State Technology Enterprise Corporation

Nystec is a not-for-profit technology consulting company, advising organizations, agencies, institutions, and businesses. nystec's mission is to provide superior consulting services to assist state and government clients in successfully…

Unclassified
5
Technology Club of Syracuse
—
6
Fuzehub Inc

Fuzehub works to better connect new york's small and mid-sized manufacturing companies to the resources, programs and expertise they need for technology commercialization, innovative solutions and business growth.

Community Improvement
7
Cny Works Inc

To bring businesses, job seekers and training providers together to provide skilled workers for every business and employment for every job seeker.

—
8
New York City Industrial Technology Assistance Corporation

To strengthen the economy and job base of new york city by improving the competitiveness of local industrial and technology firms.

—
9
Center for Technology & Innovation Inc

To document and present in context the inventions and industrial innovations of New York's Southern Tier.

Arts & Culture
10
Manufacturers Association of Central New York Inc

The mission of the organization is to facilitate the long term success of manufacturers in new york state. the association advocates a favorable business climate in new york state and provides professional services to enhance the success…

—
11
New York Genome Center Inc

Operate a state-of-the-art, world-class genomic research center that creates and uses advanced genomics to understand the genetic basis of disease. for more information, see schedule o.

Health
12
New York Center for Research Economic Advancement Technology Engineeringand

The new york center for research, economic advancement, technology, engineering and science corporation (ny creates) formed for the purpose of advancing scientific research, education and economic development within new york state.…

Science & Tech
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Center for Economic Growth Inc; the most unlike its peers is Central Association for the Blind Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

8 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. 8 of the 25 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)
8/8
Grantees still filing
4/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NEW YORK EMBROIDERY STUDEO: $75,000 · OtherNEW YORK EMBROIDERY STUDEOCohesive Robotics: $47,742 · OtherCohesive RoboticsPVILION TECHNOLOGIES LLC: $25,000 · OtherPVILION TECHNOLOGIES LLCGAL Manufacturing Company LLC: $20,000 · OtherGAL Manufacturing Company LLCYula Corp: $20,000 · OtherYula CorpTempco Glass Fabrication LLC: $14,450 · Other+12 more: $113,530 · Other+12 moreNEXTCORPS INC: $43,000 · Social ScienceNEXTCORPS INCCENTER FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH INC: $10,000 · Social ScienceCENTER FOR ECO…The Research Foundation for The State University of New York: $20,000 · EducationCITEC INC: $10,000 · EducationALLIANCE FOR MANUFACTURING AND TECHNOLOGY OF THE SOUTHERN TIER INC: $10,000 · EmploymentCENTRAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE BLIND INC: $10,000 · HealthWESTERN NEW YORK TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT CENTER INC: $10,000 · Science & Tech
Other$315,722Social Science$53,000Education$30,000Employment$10,000Health$10,000Science & Tech$10,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNEXTCORPS INC: $43,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetThe Research Foundation for The State University of New York: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCENTRAL NEW YORK TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetCITEC INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetALLIANCE FOR MANUFACTURING AND TECHNOLOGY OF THE SOUTHERN TIER INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCENTRAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE BLIND INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCENTER FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetWESTERN NEW YORK TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT CENTER INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% 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 NEXTCORPS INC ↗
  • Who funds The Research Foundation for The State University of New York ↗
  • Who funds CENTRAL NEW YORK TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION INC ↗
  • Who funds CITEC INC ↗
  • Who funds ALLIANCE FOR MANUFACTURING AND TECHNOLOGY OF THE SOUTHERN TIER INC ↗
  • Who funds CENTRAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE BLIND INC ↗
  • Who funds CENTER FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH INC ↗
  • Who funds WESTERN NEW YORK TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT CENTER INC ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Fuzehub IncNY17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fuzehub Inc

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization New York City Industrial Technology Assistance Corporation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from New York City Industrial Technology Assistance Corporation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's 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
    5report 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
    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 New York City Industrial Technology Assistance Corporation?

    Find your warmest path to New York City Industrial Technology Assistance Corporation 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 25 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 New York City Industrial Technology Assistance’s filings →

    More from the funding graph