Skip to content
Society of Photo Optical Instrumentation Engineers at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Society of Photo Optical Instrumentation Engineers

SPIE is an international nonprofit technical society dedicated to advancing scientific research and engineering applications of optical, photonic, imaging and optoelectronic technologies through its meetings, education programs and publications.

$2.6M
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$500k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Education$3.9MHealth$229kScience & Tech$180kReligion$150kArts & Culture$27kEnvironment$15kPhilanthropy$15kInternational$7kOther$0
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $823,443, the rows itemized in this filing. The $2,605,866 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $1,782,423 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 $10k2 grants · $15k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $87k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $221k
  • $250k+1 grant · $500k
$49,859
Median grant
8
States reached
$167M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Fdn of the Univ of North Carolina at Charlotte$500,000
Monroe Community College Foundation$96,024
Washington University$75,000
UT Southwestern Medical Ctr$50,000
Thorlabs Inc$49,859
Michigan Tech University$22,200
IEEE$15,000
The Univ of Arizon Controllers Dep Acct$8,900
Ithaka Harbors$6,460
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 79% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%University of Arizona Foundation: $500k → 15%Delaware State Univ Foundation: $50k → 11%Mass General Brigham: $75k → 8%MA General Hospital: $75k → 16%Advanced Optronics LLC: $10k → 11%Foldscope Instruments Inc: $13k → 8%Univ of California -Irvine: $75k → 10%Swave Photonics Inc: $10k → 11%California Institute of Technology: $75k → 14%Carbonfund org Foundation Inc: $15k → 13%Monroe Community College Foundation: $96k → 14%Science Counts Inc: $10k → 11%UT Southwestern Medical Ctr: $50k → 14%University of Houston: $75k → 16%Michigan Tech University: $35k → 14%Tuskegee University: $100k → 32%Washington University: $75k → 21%UWRF Foundation: $50k → 9%Endeavor Business Media LLC: $10k → 14%Fdn of the Univ of North Carolina at Charlotte: $500k → 10%Morehouse College: $50k → 13%SPARK Museum: $10k → 12%The University of Chicago (MIDRC): $10k → 14%PhotoniCare Inc: $10k → 19%Thorlabs Inc: $50k → 6%IEEE: $15k → 8%Univ of MD College Park Foundation: $10k → 11%Uniiversity of Arizona Foundation: $35k → 15%MIT: $75k → 8%Trustees of Boston University: $502k → 16%Avenda Health: $12k → 14%Monroe Community College Foundation: $33k → 14%UT Southwestern Medical Ctr: $50k → 14%UCF Foundation: $328k → 13%Michigan Tech University: $25k → 14%Odin Technologies LLC: $10k → 14%Massachusetts General Corporation: $75k → 16%Monroe Community College Foundation: $15k → 14%UCF Foundation: $100k → 13%Michigan Tech University: $22k → 14%Trustees of Boston University: $75k → 16%Sydor Optics Inc: $25k → 14%UCF Foundation: $25k → 13%Michigan Tech University: $21k → 14%University of Rochester: $500k → 14%Michigan Tech University: $20k → 14%Michigan Tech Fund: $12k → 14%Michigan Tech University: $12k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
PA
CA
CO
MD
DE
AZ
TN
DC
AL
GA
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region: $1.1M on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 8 regions, $333k to organizations and $730k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$425k · 40% · 4 grants · 272 people

Stated purpose: General Support · SPARK Grant · Awards

East Asia and the Pacific$300k · 28% · 3 grants · 225 people

Stated purpose: SPARK Grant · Sponsorship · Student Chapter Activity Grant

North America (Canada and Mexico)$198k · 19% · 2 grants · 128 people

Stated purpose: SPARK Grant · Sponsorship · Awards

South Asia$51k · 5% · 67 people

Stated purpose: Education Scholarships · Conference Fee Waivers · Student Chapter Activity Grant

South America$27k · 3% · 24 people

Stated purpose: Awards · Education Scholarships · Conference Fee Waivers

Middle East and North Africa$26k · 2% · 20 people

Stated purpose: Awards · Education Scholarships · Conference Fee Waivers

Sub-Saharan Africa$23k · 2% · 1 grant · 8 people

Stated purpose: General Support · Education Scholarships · Conference Fee Waivers

Russia and Neighboring States$13k · 1% · 10 people

Stated purpose: Education Scholarships · Conference Fee Waivers · Student Chapter Activity Grant

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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

65%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.4M · 13 repeat orgs$1.8M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +32% since the first grant, against -1% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
30

Total granted

$3.4M
$1.2M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+32%
-1%

Still filing today

77%
57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 22% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $640k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationArts & CultureScience & TechEnvironmentSocial SciencePhilanthropyOther
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

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION
    3× · 2020–2024 · $610k · revenue +76%
  • TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY
    2× · 2019–2024 · $577k · revenue +32%
  • University of Arizona Foundation
    2× · 2019–2022 · $545k · revenue +20%

Funded once

  • Vanderbilt University
    one grant, 2021 · $500k · revenue -1%
  • TU
    Tuskegee University
    one grant, 2024 · $100k · revenue -8%
  • CI
    CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
    one grant, 2024 · $75k · revenue -15%
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
Trustees of Dartmouth College

Dartmouth College educates the most promising students and prepares them for a lifetime of learning and of responsible leadership, through a faculty dedicated to teaching and the creation of knowledge.

Education
2
Trustees of Tufts College

Education and Research

Education
3
Worcester Polytechnic Institute

Wpi transforms lives, turns knowledge into action to confront global challenges, and revolutionizes stem through distinctive and inclusive education, projects and research. (http://www.wpi.edu/about/mission.html)

—
4
University of Virginia Investment Management Company

The university of virginia investment management company (uvimco) is organized to invest funds on behalf of the rector and visitors of the university of virginia (the university or uva) and university-associated organizations (uaos).

Education
5
The Trustees of Princeton University

Research, education and general - princeton university is a private not-for-profit, non-sectarian institution of higher learning with approximately 5,700 undergraduate and 3,300 graduate students. 2,500 students graduated in the 2024-2025…

Education
6
Furman University

The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.

Education
7
The George Washington University

The mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…

Education
8
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
9
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
10
The University of Tulsa

The university of tulsa is a student-centered research university that cultivates interconnected learning experiences to explore complex ideas and create new knowledge in a spirit of free inquiry. guided by our commitment to diversity,…

Education
11
President and Fellows of Harvard College

Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.

Education
12
Augustana College

Rooted in the liberal arts & sciences & lutheran expression of the christian faith, & is committed to offering a challenging education that develops qualities of mind, spirit, & body necessary for a rewarding life of leadership & service…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of Maryland College Park Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Sciencecounts 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

30 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. 30 of the 48 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
30/30
Grantees still filing
17/30
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION: $610,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATIONUniversity of Arizona Foundation: $545,000 · EducationUniversity of Arizona FoundationUNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER: $517,400 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTERVanderbilt University: $500,000 · EducationVanderbilt UniversityUNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA FOUNDATION INC: $452,500 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA FOUNDATION INC+12 more: $519,280 · Education+12 moreTRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY: $576,500 · OtherTRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITYFOUNDATION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHARLOTTE: $500,000 · OtherFOUNDATION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAR…MASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORATED: $232,180 · OtherMASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORATEDMONROE COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC: $143,800 · OtherMONROE COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION INCMichigan Tech University: $135,443 · OtherMichigan Tech UniversityREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT IRVINE: $75,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON: $75,000 · Other+16 more: $225,166 · Other+16 moreUT SOUTHWESTERN HEALTH SYSTEMS: $100,000 · HealthITHAKA HARBORS INC: $51,680 · Social ScienceSpark Museum of Electrical Invention: $10,000 · Arts & CultureROCHESTER MUSEUM & SCIENCE CENTER: $7,000 · Arts & CultureENVIRONMENT NEXT INC: $15,000 · EnvironmentOSA Foundation Inc: $14,749 · PhilanthropyNATIONAL SPACE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY INSTITUTE: $7,500 · Science & TechAmerican Association of Physics Teachers Inc: $6,000 · Science & Tech
Education$3,144,180Other$1,963,089Health$100,000Social Science$51,680Arts & Culture$17,000Environment$15,000Philanthropy$14,749Science & Tech$13,500

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION: $610,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetTRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY: $576,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Arizona Foundation: $545,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER: $517,400 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetFOUNDATION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHARLOTTE: $500,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetVanderbilt University: $500,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA FOUNDATION INC: $452,500 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetMONROE COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC: $143,800 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetUT SOUTHWESTERN HEALTH SYSTEMS: $100,000 over 2y, 2.2% of budgetTuskegee University: $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $75,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMassachusetts Institute of Technology: $75,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $75,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetITHAKA HARBORS INC: $51,680 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN - RIVER FALLS FOUNDATION INC: $50,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetDELAWARE STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMOREHOUSE COLLEGE: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetENVIRONMENT NEXT INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetOSA Foundation Inc: $14,749 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetARIZONA TECHNOLOGY COUNCIL: $13,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetSpark Museum of Electrical Invention: $10,000 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetUniversity of Chicago: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL SPACE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY INSTITUTE: $7,500 over 1y, 8.4% of budgetROCHESTER MUSEUM & SCIENCE CENTER: $7,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetRochester Institute of Technology: $6,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR WESTERN WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY AND ALUMNI: $6,000 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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Jpmorgan Chase Founda…The Pfizer Foundation…The Blackbaud Giving …Morgan Stanley Global…National Philanthropi…American Endowment Fo…The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Jpmorgan Chase FoundationNY7.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Society of Photo Optical Instrumentation Engineers funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Society of Photo Optical Instrumentation Engineers. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 12%
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology: 35% of income from government
  • Trustees of Boston University: 12% of income from government
  • American Association of Physics Teachers Inc: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
3report 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.

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 48 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 Society of Photo Optical Instrumentation Engineers’ 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