Skip to content
The Electrochemical Society Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

The Electrochemical Society Inc

To encourage research, discussion, critical assessment, and dissemination of knowledge in these fields, the Society offers memberships, holds meetings and symposiums, publishes scientific papers and journals, fosters training and education of scientists and engineers and cooperates with other organizations to promote science and…

$336k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$50k
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 2025.

Science & Tech$950kEducation$460kHealth$50k
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $150,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $335,500 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $185,500 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.
$50,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$25M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Drexel University$50,000
Regents The Univ of Michigan$50,000
Northeastern University$50,000
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 83% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Mass Institute of Technology: $50k → 8%Northeastern University: $50k → 16%The Pennsylvania State Univer: $50k → 16%Drexel University: $50k → 22%Stanford University: $50k → 8%REGENTS THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA FBO PROFESSOR IRYNA ZENYUK NF: $50k → 10%Regents The University of Cal: $50k → 10%CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $50k → 14%Stony Brook Foudnation: $10k → 7%Regents The Univ of Michigan: $50k → 14%University of Alabama: $50k → 17%Georgia Tech Research Corp: $50k → 13%UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME: $50k → 13%PURDUE UNIVERSITY: $50k → 19%CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY: $50k → 17%The University of Chicago: $50k → 14%Northeastern University: $50k → 16%Regents The University of Cal: $50k → 10%THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA: $50k → 10%REGENTS THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA: $50k → 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

IL
MI
NY
MA
IN
OH
PA
CA
NM
TN
AL
GA
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 33% of The Electrochemical Society Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

The Electrochemical Society Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 21% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

61%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$800k · 7 repeat orgs$510k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
10

Total granted

$800k
$460k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+47%
+47%

Still filing today

57%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 67% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $50k 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
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

  • JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
    2× · 2020–2022 · $100k · revenue +42%
  • NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY
    2× · 2024–2025 · $100k · revenue +6%
  • Vanderbilt University
    2× · 2019–2020 · $100k · revenue +57%

Funded once

  • BO
    BOARD OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA
    one grant, 2024 · $50k
  • RO
    REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT IRVINE
    one grant, 2018 · $50k
  • TO
    TRUSTEES OF PURDUE UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2019 · $50k
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
University of Miami

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

Education
2
Illinois Institute of Technology

To provide distinctive and relevant education in an environment of scientific, technological, and professional knowledge creation and innovation.

Education
3
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
4
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
5
University of Southern California

The central mission of the university of southern california is the development of human beings and society as a whole through the cultivation and enrichment of the human mind and spirit. the principal means by which our mission is…

Education
6
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
7
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
8
Marquette University

As a Catholic, Jesuit university our mission is to search for truth, discover shareknowledge, foster personal professional excellence, promote a life of faith and developleadership expressed in service to others. See Schedule O.

Education
9
Institute for Advanced Study - Louis Bamberger & Mrs Felix Fuld Foundation

The institute for advanced study (the institute) is one of the world's leading centers for theoretical research and intellectual inquiry. see schedule o.

Science & Tech
10
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
11
Cornell University

Education, research, medical services and other public services.

Education
12
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.…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northeastern University; the most unlike its peers is Drexel University. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

13 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. 13 of the 21 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)
13/13
Grantees still filing
12/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $100,000 · EducationJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITYNORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY: $100,000 · EducationNORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITYVanderbilt University: $100,000 · EducationVanderbilt UniversityLOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY FOUNDATION: $100,000 · EducationLOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY FOUNDATIONUniversity of Notre Dame du Lac: $50,000 · EducationUniversity of Notre Dame du LacTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $50,000 · EducationTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVER…DREXEL UNIVERSITY: $50,000 · EducationDREXEL UNIVERSITYCASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY: $50,000 · EducationCASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITYMassachusetts Institute of Technology: $50,000 · EducationMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyUniversity of Chicago: $50,000 · EducationUniversity of ChicagoCALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $50,000 · EducationCALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY+1 more: $10,000 · EducationREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA: $200,000 · OtherREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIATHE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE: $100,000 · OtherTHE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEEREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $100,000 · OtherREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGANBOARD OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA: $50,000 · OtherBOARD OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMAREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT IRVINE: $50,000 · OtherREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT IRVINETRUSTEES OF PURDUE UNIVERSITY: $50,000 · OtherTRUSTEES OF PURDUE UNIVERSITYPENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY: $50,000 · OtherPENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITYREGENTS UNIV OF CALIFORNIA: $50,000 · OtherREGENTS UNIV OF CALIFORNIAGEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION: $50,000 · Health
Education$760,000Other$650,000Health$50,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $100,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY: $100,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetVanderbilt University: $100,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetUniversity of Notre Dame du Lac: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDREXEL UNIVERSITY: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMassachusetts Institute of Technology: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Chicago: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSTONY BROOK FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

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

2024
’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 12%
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology: 35% of income from government
  • Johns Hopkins University: 12% of income from government
  • Northeastern University: 7% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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 The Electrochemical Society Inc?

Find your warmest path to The Electrochemical Society Inc 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 21 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 Electrochemical Society’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