Skip to content
Project Innerspace Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Project Innerspace Inc

To make the production of clean, always-on geothermal energy possible anywhere in the world by 2030.

$1.9M
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$150k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through 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, FY2022 to 2024.

Science & Tech$503kEducation$237kEnvironment$92kCommunity Improvement$77kPublic Benefit$50k
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 8 grants below total $649,493, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,877,565 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $1,228,072 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 · FY2024

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $70k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $579k
$85,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$18M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FEDERATION OF AMERICAN SCIENTISTS$150,000
JATAWARE$100,000
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PETROLEUM GEOLOGISTS$97,900
SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE$85,000
RHODIUM GROUP LLC$77,440
RICE UNIVERSITY$69,153
UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST$45,000
AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS$25,000
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 (FY22–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 90% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%INNSURE CORPORATION: $50k → 8%UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST: $45k → 12%HEET (HOME ENERGY EFFICIENCY TEAM): $50k → 16%AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS: $25k → 17%UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN: $42k → 10%SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $85k → 16%RICE UNIVERSITY: $69k → 16%TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY: $100k → 22%AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PETROLEUM GEOLOGISTS: $98k → 15%JATAWARE: $100k → 14%RHODIUM GROUP LLC: $77k → 17%FEDERATION OF AMERICAN SCIENTISTS: $150k → 14%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.

Grants abroad, by region: $1.2M on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 2 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$1.2M · 94% · 7 grants

Stated purpose: GEOMAP · RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OF PROGRAM TOOLS

North America (Canada and Mexico)$68k · 6% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OF PROGRAM TOOLS

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 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
American Association for the Advancement of Science

Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…

Science & Tech
2
Associated Universities Inc

Associated universities inc (aui) collaborates with the scientific community and research sponsors to plan, build, and operate cutting-edge facilities. we cultivate excellence, deliver value, enhance education, and engage the public.

Science & Tech
3
American Institute of Physics Inc

Aip advances the physical sciences as a federation and an institute. as a federation, aip works to advance the success of its member societies and affiliates so that they can leverage their diverse expertise and contributions in advancing…

Science & Tech
4
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education
5
Acec Research Institute

Acec research institute serve as the leading source of knowledge and thought leadership for creating a more sustainable, safe, secure, and technically advanced built environment. identify, fund, and provide industry wide research forecasts…

Unclassified
6
American Society for Engineering Education

Asee advances innovation, excellence and access at all levels of education for the engineering profession

—
7
Tex-E Inc
Education
8
American Geophysical Union

Agu's mission is to advance and support an inclusive community of earth and space scientists and partners dedicated to discovery and solutions to societal challenges. agu seeks to catalyze discovery and solutions to scientific and societal…

Science & Tech
9
American Gas Association

American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…

—
10
American Geosciences Institute

The american geosciences institute (agi) was founded in 1948, under a directive of the national academy of sciences, as a network of associations representing geoscientists with a diverse array of skills and knowledge of our planet. the…

—
11
American Astronomical Society

The american astronomical society (aas), established in 1899, is the major organization of professional astronomers in north america. the basic objective of the aas is to promote the advancement of astronomy and closely related branches of…

Science & Tech
12
Iit Research Institute

Perform basic research and preclinical efficacy assessments of new molecular entities being developed for the prevention and treatment of cancer and infectious disease. Discover new pathways and targets for the design and development of…

Science & Tech
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The American Society of Mechanical Engineers; the most unlike its peers is Innsure Corporation. 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

9 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. 9 of the 12 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)
8/9
Grantees still filing
7/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

JATAWARE: $100,000 · OtherJATAWAREAMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PETROLEUM GEOLOGISTS: $97,900 · OtherAMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PETROLEUM GEO…RHODIUM GROUP LLC: $77,440 · OtherRHODIUM GROUP LLCUNIVERSITY OF TEXAS: $41,948 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF TEXASWilliam Marsh Rice University: $136,530 · EducationWilliam Marsh Rice UniversityTEXAS A&M RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $100,000 · EducationTEXAS A&M RESEARCH FOUNDATIONUNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST FOUNDATION INC: $45,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHER…FEDERATION OF AMERICAN SCIENTISTS: $150,000 · InternationalFEDERATION OF AME…Southwest Research Institute: $85,000 · Science & TechSouthwest Res…THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS: $25,000 · Science & TechTHE AMERICAN …HOME ENERGY EFFICIENCY TEAM INC: $50,000 · Housing & ShelterINNSURE CORPORATION: $50,000 · Public Benefit
Other$317,288Education$281,530International$150,000Science & Tech$110,000Housing & Shelter$50,000Public Benefit$50,000

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 budgetFEDERATION OF AMERICAN SCIENTISTS: $150,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetWilliam Marsh Rice University: $136,530 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTEXAS A&M RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PETROLEUM GEOLOGISTS: $97,900 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetSouthwest Research Institute: $85,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHOME ENERGY EFFICIENCY TEAM INC: $50,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST FOUNDATION INC: $45,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS: $25,000 over 1y, 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.

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.

Amazonsmile Foundation
Amazonsmile FoundationWA1.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Project Innerspace Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Project Innerspace Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%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
    1get no government money at all
    2report 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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Project Innerspace Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Project Innerspace Inc 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 12 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Project Innerspace’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