Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Secondmuse Foundation

The stated mission of SECONDMUSE FOUNDATION is to foster and develop diverse, participatory innovation communities that incubate solutions to social, economic and environmental issues; including through public education, facilitating the ability of private, commercial actors, entrepreneurs and governments to generate shared visions and…

$774k
Granted FY2023
10
Grants FY2023
6
States reached
$212k
Largest
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 FY20212023.

Philanthropy$324kCommunity Improvement$235kEmployment$200kScience & Tech$172kEducation$125kEnvironment$39kHuman Services$20k
02FY2023 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 10 grants below total $503,500 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $773,725 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $270,225 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2023

  • $10k–50k7 grants · $100k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $404k
$20,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$788k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MIAMI FOUNDATION$211,500
Individual grant recipient$142,000
UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO$50,000
CHICAGO INNOVATION FOUNDATION$20,000
OUT IN TECH INC$20,000
DEPAUL UNIVERSITY$15,000
CHICAGO BLEND GROUP$15,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
P33$10,000
LATINAS IN TECH$10,000
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 (FY22–23, $20k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%LATINAS IN TECH: $10k → 9%LATINAS IN TECH: $10k → 9%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

IL
NY
NJ
CA
DC
OK
GA
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.

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.

35%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$280k · 4 repeat orgs$512k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +9% since the first grant, against -1% for the ones you funded once.

4 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2023, 0 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
5

Total granted

$280k
$270k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+9%
-1%

Still filing today

100%
80%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 17% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $242k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23
Community ImprovementEducationEnvironmentHuman ServicesPhilanthropyOther

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

  • CB
    CHICAGO BLEND GROUP INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $115k · revenue +10% · 37% of their budget
  • DU
    DEPAUL UNIVERSITY
    2× · 2022–2023 · $55k · revenue +9%
  • LI
    LATINAS IN TECH INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $20k · revenue +3%

Funded once

  • OH
    OPPORTUNITY HUB
    one grant, 2022 · $188k
  • CI
    CIRCULATE INITIATIVE INC
    one grant, 2022 · $39k · revenue -52%
  • IS
    ILLINOIS SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COALITIONgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $18k · revenue +834%

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
Technology Policy Institute
International
2
Ipti Research Org for Tech and Inno Technology and Innovation Inc
3
Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce

The chicagoland chamber of commerce combines the power of people, with our legacy of leadership and business advocacy, to drive a dynamic economy. we focus on delivering value for our members, making chicagoland a world-class place to live…

4
Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc

Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…

Community Improvement
5
Toyota Technological Institute at Chicago

Achieving international impact through world-class research and education in fundamental computer science and information technology.

Education
6
Chicago United

To achieve parity in economic opportunity for people of color by advancing multiracial leadership in corporate governance, expanding the talent pipline for executive-level management, and growing minority businesses.

Philanthropy
7
Miami-Dade Innovation Authority Inc

Miami-dade innovation authority bridges the gap between private innovators and the public sector to fast track innovation that improves quality of life for miamians.

Science & Tech
8
Chicago Psychoanalytic Institute

The chicago psychoanalytic institute transforms the lives of individuals, families and communities, using psychoanalytic knowledge to help them grow and thrive.

Social Science
9
Ibio Institute

To orchestrate business leadership in delivery of world-class educational programs and job-creating new technology ventures.

Science & Tech
10
Activate Global Inc

Activate empowers scientists to reinvent the world by bringing their research to market. activate partners with u.s. based funders, research institutions, and other pillars of the hard technology community to help entrepreneurial…

Environment
11
Xchange Chicago Inc

To realize a more equitable and inclusive economy by advancing innovative workforce solutions that equip local residents with the skills and resources to access high-growth employment opportunities in tech and other rapidly growing fields…

Employment
12
Calinnovates-Org

Promote innovation and investment.

Employment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is P33 and the most unlike its peers is The Chicago Innovation Foundation. 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

12 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 20172026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 12 of the 15 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
7/12
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

OPPORTUNITY HUB — $187,500 · OtherOPPORTUNITY HUBIndividual grant recipient — $142,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTECHUPLIFT — $12,500 · Other+1 more — $10,000 · OtherTHE MIAMI FOUNDATION INC — $323,500 · PhilanthropyTHE MIAMI FOUNDATION INCTHE CHICAGO INNOVATION FOUNDATION — $20,000 · PhilanthropyTHE CHICAGO INNOVATION FOUNDATIONCHICAGO BLEND GROUP INC — $114,999 · Community ImprovementCHICAGO BLEND GROUP INCP33 — $90,000 · Community ImprovementP33ILLINOIS SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COALITION — $18,000 · Community ImprovementILLINOIS SCIENCE AND TE…WORLD BUSINESS CHICAGO — $12,500 · Community ImprovementDEPAUL UNIVERSITY — $55,000 · EducationDEPAUL UNIVE…University of Chicago — $50,000 · EducationUniversity o…OUT IN TECH INC — $20,000 · EducationOUT IN TECH …CIRCULATE INITIATIVE INC — $39,328 · EnvironmentLATINAS IN TECH INC — $20,000 · Human Services
Other$352,000Philanthropy$343,500Community Improvement$235,499Education$125,000Environment$39,328Human Services$20,000

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 budgetTHE MIAMI FOUNDATION INC — $323,500 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetCHICAGO BLEND GROUP INC — $114,999 over 2y, 37% of budgetP33 — $90,000 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetDEPAUL UNIVERSITY — $55,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Chicago — $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCIRCULATE INITIATIVE INC — $39,328 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetLATINAS IN TECH INC — $20,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetTHE CHICAGO INNOVATION FOUNDATION — $20,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetOUT IN TECH INC — $20,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetILLINOIS SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COALITION — $18,000 over 1y, 6.4% of budgetWORLD BUSINESS CHICAGO — $12,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTECHUPLIFT — $12,500 over 1y, 1.9% 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.

New Venture FundDC12.9× affinity4 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: New Venture Fund · Tides Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Secondmuse Foundation 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
202122232425
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%your share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    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 Secondmuse Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Secondmuse Foundation 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 15 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph