Skip to content
Srcco at a glance

· Public charity

Srcco

SRCCO, as a controlled affiliate of the semiconductor research corporation ("src"), funds and operates programs of university-based research centers focused on microelectronic technology that benefits both private industry and u.s.

$47M
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
7
States reached
$12M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through 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, FY2017 to 2024.

Science & Tech$345MEducation$5.8M
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $50k–250k1 grant · $56k
  • $250k+7 grants · $47M
$6,797,785
Median grant
7
States reached
$44M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Georgia Tech Research Corporation$11,915,919
The Regents of the Univ of CA San Diego$7,600,000
The Trustees of the Columbia Univ in NYC$6,980,176
Cornell University$6,797,785
The Pennsylvania State University$6,700,000
The Board of Trustees of the Univ of IL$6,407,419
National Science Foundation$600,000
The Regents of the Univ of Michigan$56,037
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 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 91% 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 MINNESOTA: $4.5M → 11%Carnegie Mellon University: $6.9M → 11%THE PENNSYLVANIA UNIVERSITY: $6.7M → 16%The Regents of the Univ of CA San Diego: $7.6M → 11%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES: $6.0M → 14%The Regents of the University of California: $7.4M → 14%CORNELL UNIVERSITY: $6.9M → 16%THE TRUSTEES OF THE COLUMBIA UNIV IN NYC: $7.0M → 17%UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $6.7M → 14%Purdue University: $8.7M → 16%University of Notre Dame: $9.1M → 13%The Board of Trustees of the Univ of IL: $6.4M → 19%The Rector and Visitors of the University of Virgi: $6.2M → 8%Carnegie Mellon University: $6.8M → 11%The Pennsylvania State University: $6.7M → 16%THE REGENTS OF THE UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO: $7.6M → 11%The Regents of the University of California- Santa: $7.2M → 14%Cornell University: $6.8M → 16%The Trustees of the Columbia Univ in NYC: $7.0M → 17%The Regents of the University of Michigan: $6.2M → 14%Purdue University: $8.4M → 16%University of Notre Dame: $8.6M → 13%THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIV OF IL: $6.3M → 19%The Rectors & Visitors of the Univ of VA: $6.2M → 8%Carnegie Mellon University: $6.4M → 11%The Regents of the University of California Santa: $7.2M → 14%The Regents of the University of Michigan: $6.1M → 14%Purdue University: $7.7M → 16%University of Notre Dame: $8.4M → 13%UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS URBANA CHAMPAIGN: $5.4M → 19%The Rectors and Visitors of the Univ of VA: $5.8M → 8%Carnegie Mellon University: $5.0M → 11%The Regents of the University of California- Santa: $6.2M → 14%The Regents of the University of Michigan: $5.8M → 14%Purdue University: $6.2M → 16%GEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION: $11.9M → 13%University of Notre Dame: $7.0M → 13%The Rectors and Visitors of the University of Virg: $4.8M → 8%Carnegie Mellon University: $4.9M → 11%The Regents of the University of California Santa: $5.2M → 14%The Regents of the University of Michigan: $4.7M → 14%Purdue University: $5.9M → 16%Georgia Tech Research Corporation: $11.9M → 13%University of Notre Dame: $5.7M → 13%The Rectors and Visitors of the Univ of VA: $4.6M → 8%The Regents of the University of Michigan: $4.3M → 14%UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME: $5.5M → 13%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIABERKELEY: $4.9M → 10%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

MN
IL
MI
NY
MA
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CA
NE
VA
AZ
DC
GA
TX
FL
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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$277M · 22 repeat orgs$6.0M to everyone else

22 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2024, 15 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

22
1

Total granted

$277M
$6.0M

Still filing today

27%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EducationHealthOther
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

  • CM
    Carnegie Mellon University
    6× · 2018–2023 · $31M · revenue +64%
  • GT
    GEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION
    5× · 2018–2024 · $24M · revenue +54%
  • Cornell University
    5× · 2018–2024 · $15M · revenue +49%

Funded once

  • RU
    REGENTS UNIV OF CALIFORNIA
    one grant, 2017 · $6.0M
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
Case Western Reserve University

Case Western Reserve University is an independent, research-oriented university with broadly based strengths in health, including medicine, nursing and dentistry; in engineering; in the arts and sciences; and in law, management and social…

Education
2
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
3
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
4
Trustees of Boston University

Organization's mission: boston university is an international, comprehensive, private research university, committed to educating students to be reflective, resourceful individuals ready to live, adapt, and lead in an interconnected world.…

—
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
Trustees of Tufts College

Education and Research

Education
7
University of Miami

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

Education
8
Trustees of Boston College

Mission strengthened by more than a century and a half of dedication to academic excellence, boston college commits itself to the highest standards of teaching and research in undergraduate, graduate and professional programs and to the…

Education
9
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
10
Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania

The trustees of the university of pennsylvania (the "university") sees itself as having a public service mission. in such regard, the university aims to provide a rich and diverse educational environment for its students; to pioneer…

Education
11
William Marsh Rice University

As a leading research university with a distinctive commitment to undergraduate education, Rice University aspires to path breaking research, unsurpassed teaching, and contributions to the betterment of our world. It seeks to fulfill this…

Education
12
New York University

Nyu is a private university with approximately 60,000 matriculating students in 20 schools and institutes. nyu's primary missions are education, research and scholarship, and patient care.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Carnegie Mellon University; the most unlike its peers is University of Notre Dame du Lac. 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

10 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. 10 of the 27 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)
10/10
Grantees still filing
10/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TRUSTEES OF PURDUE UNIVERSITY: $39,283,475 · OtherTRUSTEES OF PURDUE UNIVERSITYUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA BARBARA: $36,063,959 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA BARBARAREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $35,854,905 · OtherREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGANCarnegie Mellon University: $31,180,114 · OtherCarnegie Mellon UniversityRECTOR & VISITORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA: $29,364,414 · OtherRECTOR & VISITORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIATHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS: $18,028,913 · OtherTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOISREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT SAN DIEGO: $15,200,000 · OtherREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT SAN DIEGOPENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY: $13,400,000 · OtherPENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITYUNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA: $12,043,113 · Other+9 more: $13,941,882 · Other+9 moreUniversity of Notre Dame du Lac: $47,227,044 · EducationUniversity of Notre Dame d…Cornell University: $14,584,096 · EducationCornell UniversityTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK: $14,108,818 · EducationTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA U…THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $6,091,130 · EducationTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF T…+4 more: $641,028 · EducationGEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION: $23,982,204 · Health
Other$244,360,775Education$82,652,116Health$23,982,204

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 budgetUniversity of Notre Dame du Lac: $47,227,044 over 7y, 0.4% of budgetCarnegie Mellon University: $31,180,114 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetGEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION: $23,982,204 over 5y, 2.8% of budgetCornell University: $14,584,096 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK: $14,108,818 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $6,091,130 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetThe George Washington University: $250,012 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetThe Trustees of Princeton University: $167,016 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetGEORGIA TECH FOUNDATION INC: $135,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetMassachusetts Institute of Technology: $89,000 over 3y, 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.

  • Who funds University of Notre Dame du Lac ↗
  • Who funds Carnegie Mellon University ↗
  • Who funds GEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds Cornell University ↗
  • Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
  • Who funds THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds The George Washington University ↗
  • Who funds The Trustees of Princeton University ↗
  • Who funds GEORGIA TECH FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Massachusetts Institute of Technology ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Srcco funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Srcco. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 26%
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology: 26% of income from government
  • The Trustees of Princeton University: 12% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Srcco?

Find your warmest path to Srcco 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 27 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 Srcco’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