Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Research Corporation dba Research Corporation for Science Advancement

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$8.0M
Granted FY2024still arriving
165
Grants FY2024still arriving
33
States reached
$193k
Largest
01What you fund
01

What you funded, over time

By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 63% of Research Corporation dba Research Corporation for Science Advancement’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.

02FY2024 · 165 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k35 grants · $110k
  • $10k–50k36 grants · $847k
  • $50k–250k94 grants · $7.0M
$55,000
Median grant
33
States reached
$241M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Northwestern University$193,142
Trinity University$120,000
University of Michigan$120,000
University of South Florida$120,000
Pennsylvania State University$120,000
University of Missouri$120,000
Harvard University$120,000
California Institute of Technology$120,000
University of California Riverside$120,000
California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo$120,000
University of Utah$120,000
University of Toledo$120,000
Queen's University$120,000
Hope College$120,000
University of Tennessee Knoxville$120,000
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 (FY20–24, $12k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CAMP KESEM: $3k → 14%AVIVA Children's Services: $3k → 15%AVIVA Children's Services: $3k → 15%AVIVA CHILDREN'S SERVICES: $3k → 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.

Which US states your grants reach

ME
VT
NH
WA
MT
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
IA
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
UT
CO
NE
MO
KY
WV
VA
MD
DE
AZ
NM
KS
AR
TN
NC
SC
DC
OK
LA
MS
AL
GA
TX
FL

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 9% of Research Corporation dba Research Corporation for Science Advancement’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.

Research Corporation dba Research Corporation for Science Advancementlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 3.9% directed abroad (not shown)

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.

80%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$25M · 107 repeat orgs$6.5M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +32% since the first grant, against +19% for the ones you funded once.

107 repeat relationships — 69 still active in FY2024, 38 since wound down; 27 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

107
90

Total granted

$25M
$4.7M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+32%
+19%

Still filing today

46%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.9M went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24
EducationScience & TechHealthArts & CultureHuman ServicesRecreation & SportsOther

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

  • Northwestern University
    5× · 2020–2024 · $1.3M · revenue +33%
  • UO
    University of Michigan
    5× · 2020–2024 · $773k · revenue +139% · 66% of their budget
  • University of Chicago
    4× · 2020–2024 · $525k · revenue +52%

Funded once

  • CS
    COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2021 · $200k
  • RT
    RUTGERS THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW JERSEY
    one grant, 2022 · $165k
  • RU
    Rutgers University - New Brunswick
    one grant, 2023 · $155k

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
Lehigh University

The university's goal in the coming decade is to advance learning through the integration of teaching, research and service to others. the core of this goal is to prepare graduates to engage with the world and lead lives of meaning. to do…

Education
2
University of Miami

See Form 990, Part I, Line 1, Description of Organization Mission.

Education
3
University of New Haven

The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…

Education
4
Western New England University

Western new england university, a comprehensive private institution with a tradition of excellence in teaching and scholarship and a commitment to service, awards undergraduate, master's, and doctoral degrees in various departments from…

Education
5
The Catholic University of America

As the national university of the catholic church in the united states, founded and sponsored by the bishops of the country with the approval of the holy see, the catholic university of america is committed to being a comprehensive…

Education
6
Manhattanville University

To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.

Education
7
Boston Architectural College

The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.

8
Albright College

As a diverse community of learners, we cultivate integrity, curiosity, connection and resilience.

Education
9
Drexel University

Drexel university fulfills its founder's vision of preparing each new generation of students for productive professional and civic lives while also focusing its collective expertise on solving society's greatest problems. drexel is an…

Education
10
Trustees of Clark University

Clark university's mission is to educate undergraduate and graduate students to be imaginative and contributing citizens of the world, and to advance the frontiers of knowledge and understanding through rigorous scholarship and creative…

Education
11
California Lutheran University

The mission of the university is to educate leaders for a global society who are strong in character and judgment, confident in their identity and vocation, and committed to service and justice.

Education
12
Dickinson College

Dickinson college provides a useful, innovative and interdisciplinary education in the liberal arts and sciences to prepare students to lead rich and fulfilling lives of engaged global citizenship

Education

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Georgetown University and the most unlike its peers is The Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyCommunity College Foundatio…Women & Girls Leadership De…Orchestra and Ensemble Perf…Health Access Advocacy and …Faith-Based Liberal Arts Co…Community Foundations
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 68 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%1%<5yr14%3%5–10yr19%7%10–20yr16%13%20–35yr13%14%35–55yr16%63%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%0%<5yr14%2%5–10yr19%7%10–20yr16%8%20–35yr13%14%35–55yr16%70%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/130
the rest of the field
13%
240,396/1,819,435

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

107 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 107 of the 238 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
107/107
Grantees still filing
86/107
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO — $915,000 · OtherUniversity of Michigan — $773,256 · OtherArizona State University — $771,540 · Other+126 more — $19,583,468 · Other+126 moreUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA — $715,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIATHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK — $619,363 · EducationTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY…University of Chicago — $525,000 · EducationJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY — $425,000 · EducationCALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY — $425,000 · EducationTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA — $390,278 · EducationCASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY — $385,000 · Education+54 more — $7,264,505 · Education+54 moreNorthwestern University — $1,288,707 · Recreation & SportsMARINE BIOLOGICAL LABORATORY — $66,000 · Science & TechCARNEGIE INSTITUTION OF WASHINGTON — $55,000 · Science & TechAMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY — $53,000 · Science & TechAMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY — $51,250 · Science & TechNATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES — $25,000 · Science & TechTHE SCRIPPS RESEARCH INSTITUTE — $175,000 · HealthTHE TRANSLATIONAL GENOMICS RESEARCH INSTITUTE — $54,835 · HealthBROWN UNIVERSITY — $100,000 · Community ImprovementROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC — $100,000 · Philanthropy
Other$22,043,264Education$10,749,146Recreation & Sports$1,288,707Science & Tech$250,250Health$229,835Community Improvement$100,000Philanthropy$100,000

Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.

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 budgetNorthwestern University — $1,288,707 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Michigan — $773,256 over 5y, 66% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA — $715,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK — $619,363 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Chicago — $525,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY — $425,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY — $425,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA — $390,278 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY — $385,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY — $385,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH — $350,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMassachusetts Institute of Technology — $311,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER — $307,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCornell University — $276,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCHAPMAN UNIVERSITY — $260,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO — $258,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetHarvey Mudd College — $255,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetAMHERST COLLEGE TRUSTEES — $250,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCarnegie Mellon University — $242,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTrinity University — $230,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWilliam Marsh Rice University — $221,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ADMINISTRATORS OF THE TULANE EDUCATIONAL FUND — $212,293 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNew York University — $210,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWilliams College — $200,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSWARTHMORE COLLEGE — $200,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetVanderbilt University — $184,280 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SCRIPPS RESEARCH INSTITUTE — $175,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY — $166,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMACALESTER COLLEGE — $155,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTemple University - Of The Commonwealth System of Higher Education — $155,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSEATTLE UNIVERSITY — $155,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRANKLIN & MARSHALL COLLEGE — $150,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTRUSTEES OF THE COLLEGE OF THE HOLY CROSS — $150,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Arizona Foundation — $146,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTrustees of Dartmouth College — $145,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFURMAN UNIVERSITY — $135,800 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTrustees of Tufts College — $135,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHOPE COLLEGE — $133,880 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetSYRACUSE UNIVERSITY — $125,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPresident and Fellows of Harvard College — $120,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTrustees of Hamilton College — $120,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTRUSTEES OF BOSTON COLLEGE — $116,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetScripps College — $110,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWASHINGTON UNIVERSITY — $110,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBaylor College of Medicine — $110,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetDUKE UNIVERSITY — $107,640 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCORPORATION OF HAVERFORD COLLEGE — $102,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetVASSAR COLLEGE — $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds Northwestern University
  • Who funds University of Michigan
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
  • Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK
  • Who funds University of Chicago
  • Who funds JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
  • Who funds CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
  • Who funds TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
  • Who funds CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY
  • Who funds TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH
  • Who funds Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER
  • Who funds Cornell University
  • Who funds CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO
  • Who funds Harvey Mudd College

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.

Gordon E and Betty I Moore FoundationCA20.9× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Gordon E and Betty I Moore Foundation · The Kavli Foundation · The Simons Foundation Inc · Alfred P Sloan Foundation · The Heising-Simons Foundation · The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York · Community Foundation for Southern Arizona · Johns Hopkins University · Shell USA Company Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · Jpmorgan Chase 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 Research Corporation dba Research Corporation for Science Advancement 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 20%5%19%42%75%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 9%
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology35% of income from government
  • University of Delaware30% of income from government
  • Marine Biological Laboratory20% of income from government
  • Trustees of Tufts College13% of income from government
  • Trustees of Boston University12% of income from government
  • Johns Hopkins University12% of income from government
  • The Trustees of the Stevens Institute of Technology12% of income from government
  • The Trustees of Princeton University11% of income from government
  • Brandeis University9% of income from government
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College7% of income from government
  • Northeastern University7% of income from government
  • Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Inc3% of income from government
  • Trustees of Boston College3% of income from government
  • American Physical Society1% of income from government
  • The Trustees of Mount Holyoke College1% of income from government
  • The Electrochemical Society Inc1% of income from government
  • Amherst College Trustees0% of income from government
  • Williams College0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
9report 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, FY2025

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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Research Corporation dba Research Corporation for Science Advancement?

Find your warmest path to Research Corporation dba Research Corporation for Science Advancement 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 238 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph