Skip to content
Rev1 Ventures at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Rev1 Ventures

We help entrepreneurs of central ohio tech start-ups build great companies through our unique venture development services, business incubator and capital attraction.

$988k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$250k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Employment$2.4MScience & Tech$1.8MHealth$810kCrime & Legal$425kCommunity Improvement$366kYouth Development$240kHousing & Shelter$125kFood & Nutrition$103kOther$0
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 7 grants below total $960,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $988,000 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $28,000 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 · FY2024

  • $50k–250k6 grants · $710k
  • $250k+1 grant · $250k
$110,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$34M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HYPERPATH$250,000
LACCLAMP$150,000
OBJECTIVE HEARING$150,000
GENOSERA$110,000
ICARENETWORK$100,000
MYLE$100,000
ARMA$100,000
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 95% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%ENLIGHTEN MOBILITY LLC: $150k → 13%MYLE: $100k → 5%EQUITEK: $100k → 10%ANEXIS LLC: $100k → 17%HYPERPATH: $250k → 22%SUREIMPACT: $100k → 5%HYPERPATH SOLUTIONS: $140k → 22%AGILE ULTRASONICS CORPORATION: $95k → 15%F13 WORKS LLC: $75k → 15%DIGITAL STORY THERAPIES INC: $110k → 15%MOBIKIT INC: $100k → 15%AVE AUTOMEDIA INC: $100k → 15%HEALTHPLAN DATA SOLUTIONS: $100k → 15%FLERI: $100k → 15%NEUVANTA LLC: $75k → 15%MATSAKI TECHNOLOGIES INC: $150k → 15%RESCON TECHNOLOGIES: $149k → 15%UBIHERE INC: $125k → 15%OBJECTIVE HEARING: $150k → 15%ZVELT THERAPEUTICS INC: $300k → 15%REDBUD SOFTWARE INC: $245k → 15%NEURAL EAR: $150k → 15%LACCLAMP: $150k → 15%PROTEIN CAPTURE SCIENCE: $150k → 15%GAMES THAT MOVE YOU: $150k → 15%HYPERDAMPING INC: $140k → 15%CORE QUANTUM TECHNOLOGIES: $131k → 15%GENOSERA: $110k → 15%SPEEDWELL & YARROW INC: $100k → 15%KORU BIOPHARMA INC: $100k → 15%ICARENETWORK: $100k → 15%SUPER-H ANALYTICS INC: $100k → 15%AWAREABILITY: $100k → 15%MAVENVIEW: $100k → 15%UBIHERE INC: $65k → 15%SIGHT4ALL INC: $60k → 15%SAFEWHITE INC: $50k → 15%SIMPLE FILL INC: $53k → 15%HDO HEALTH: $150k → 15%MYOPTECH: $150k → 15%ARMA: $100k → 15%PORTAL GREEN LLC: $100k → 15%OFF THE BEATEN PATH COFFEE: $100k → 15%DASISIMULATIONS: $66k → 15%INNOVATE IP INC: $100k → 15%INNOVATE IP INC: $100k → 15%INNOVATE IP INC: $55k → 15%BEEHEX LLC: $125k → 15%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.

29%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.9M · 10 repeat orgs$4.7M to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
41

Total granted

$1.9M
$4.0M

Still filing today

0%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 26% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $710k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
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

  • H
    HYPERPATH
    2× · 2022–2024 · $390k
  • RS
    REDBUD SOFTWARE INC
    2× · 2018–2019 · $345k
  • II
    INNOVATE IP INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $255k

Funded once

  • ZT
    ZVELT THERAPEUTICS INC
    one grant, 2022 · $300k
  • M
    MYOPTECH
    one grant, 2023 · $150k
  • HH
    HDO HEALTH
    one grant, 2022 · $150k
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, 2017–2024.

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 2024, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 0 of the 57 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

HYPERPATH: $390,000 · OtherHYPERPATHREDBUD SOFTWARE INC: $345,000 · OtherZVELT THERAPEUTICS INC: $300,000 · OtherINNOVATE IP INC: $255,000 · Other+53 more: $5,391,108 · Other+53 more
Other$6,681,108

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.

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 57 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 Rev1 Ventures’ 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