Skip to content

· Public charity

The Institute for Intergovernmental Research Inc

Iir's mission is to respond to the needs of criminal justice agencies across the country through the administration of grant funded programs that have a positive impact on local, state, federal, tribal, and territorial law enforcement and criminal justice agencies.

$4.8M
Granted FY2025still arriving
37
Grants FY2025still arriving
20
States reached
$2.5M
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2022 to 2025.

Health$22MCrime & Legal$13MPublic Safety & Disaster$1.2MCommunity Improvement$466kSocial Science$372kHuman Services$33kYouth Development$12k
02FY2025 · 37 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $23k
  • $10k–50k13 grants · $372k
  • $50k–250k20 grants · $1.9M
  • $250k+1 grant · $2.5M
$54,346
Median grant
20
States reached
$7.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
INTEGRATED JUSTICE INFORMATION STSTEMS INSTITUTE INC$2,535,775
UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND COLLEGE PARK$185,603
UNIVEERSITY OF NORTH DAKOTA$168,183
NATIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS MEMORIAL FUND INC$160,541
RULO STRATEGIES$131,776
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CHIEFS OF POLICE INCORPORATED$130,822
HAMILTON COUNTY OH$113,188
NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF BLACK LAW ENFORCEMENT EXECUTIVES$106,798
SANTA FE COUNTY$104,183
ADVOCATES FOR HUMAN POTENTIAL$91,790
JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY$89,661
FELLOWSHIP HOUSE INC$80,566
HARNETT COUNTY$74,986
CITY OF LUBBOCK$73,392
STEVENS COUNTY DBA NORTHEAST WASHINGTON ALLIANCE COUNSELING SERVICES$62,600
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:

Its human-services grants (FY22–25, $414k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 96% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%NAWLEE FOUNDATION INC: $18k → 8%CARTER'S CREW: $9k → 17%THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR THE PREVENTION OF COMMUNITY VIOLENCE: $388k → 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

ME
WA
ND
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
UT
CO
NE
MO
KY
WV
VA
MD
AZ
NM
KS
AR
TN
NC
SC
DC
LA
AL
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.
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 20% of The Institute for Intergovernmental Research Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

The Institute for Intergovernmental Research Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 20% 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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$33M · 79 repeat orgs$4.8M to everyone else

79 repeat relationships: 27 still active in FY2025, 52 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

79
60

Total granted

$33M
$4.4M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+9%
+39%

Still filing today

33%
8%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $383k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
HealthCrime & LegalHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementEducationSocial ScienceOther
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

  • PS
    PORTER-STARKE SERVICES INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $640k · revenue +23%
  • PH
    Prisma Health-Upstate
    2× · 2022–2023 · $480k · revenue +36%
  • SM
    ST MARY'S REGIONAL HEALTH CENTER
    2× · 2022–2023 · $374k · revenue +12%

Funded once

  • CO
    CITY OF PORTSMOUTH
    one grant, 2023 · $531k
  • ED
    EBCI DIVISION OF COMMERCE
    one grant, 2023 · $474k
  • TN
    THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR THE PREVENTION OF COMMUNITY VIOLENCEgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $388k · revenue +54%
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
National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners

Founded in 1889, the national association of regulatory utility commisioners (naruc) is a non-profit organization dedicated to representing the state public service commisions who regulate the utilities that provide essential services such…

—
2
National Narcotic Officers Associations

The association actively researches, monitors, and supports legislation designed to increase the effectiveness or narcotic enforrcement

Community Improvement
3
The National Association of State Workforce Agencies

The national association of state workforce agencies (naswa) mission is to enhance the state workforce agencies' ability to accomplish their goals, statutory roles and responsibilities.

—
4
National Alliance of Concurrent Enrollment Partnerships Inc

Advancing a national community to foster equity in dual and concurrent enrollment through accreditation, advocacy, research, and professional development.

Education
5
University of Maryland Anesthesiology Associates Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

—
6
Federation of State Medical Boards of the United States Inc

The fsmb serves as the voice for state medical boards, supporting them through education, assessment, research and advocacy while providing services and initiatives that promote patient safety, quality health care and regulatory best…

Health
7
Public Responsibility in Medicine & Research Inc

Prim&r advances the highest ethical standards in the conduct of biomedical, behavioral and social science research. prim&r accomplishes this mission through education, membership services, professional certification, public policy…

Health
8
National Association of College and University Attorneys

To advance the practice of higher education attorneys for the benefit of the institutions they serve.

—
9
National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors

The National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors (NASMHPD) is organized to reflect and advocate for the collective interest of state mental health authorities and their directors at the national level. NASMHPD analyzes…

Health
10
Search Group Incorporated

Search is dedicated to improving the quality of justice and public safety through the use, management, and exchange of information, application of new technologies, and responsible law and policy, while safeguarding security and privacy.

Crime & Legal
11
University of Maryland Neurosurgeryassociates Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

Education
12
University of Maryland Neurology Associates Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Policing Institute; the most unlike its peers is Coastlands Ministries. 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

36 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. 36 of the 149 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
36/36
Grantees still filing
22/36
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ADVOCATES FOR HUMAN POTENTIAL: $1,394,230 · OtherADVOCATES FOR HUMAN POTENTIALUNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND COLLEGE PARK: $1,311,398 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND COLLEGE PARK+121 more: $19,713,114 · Other+121 moreIntegrated Justice Information Systems Institute Inc: $10,028,314 · Crime & LegalIntegrated Justice Information…+5 more: $142,117 · Crime & LegalPORTER-STARKE SERVICES INC: $640,137 · HealthPORTER-ST…Prisma Health-Upstate: $480,226 · HealthPrisma He…ST MARY'S REGIONAL HEALTH CENTER: $374,409 · HealthST MARY'S…WESTCARE TENNESSEE INC: $358,999 · HealthWESTCARE …ARKANSAS RURAL HEALTH PARTNERSHIP INC: $329,332 · HealthARKANSAS …SMA HEALTHCARE INC: $313,209 · HealthSMA HEALT…MSTEPP INC: $273,274 · HealthMSTEPP IN…WESTCHESTER-ELLENVILLE HOSPITAL INC: $218,925 · HealthWESTCHEST…AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF SUICIDOLOGY: $170,188 · HealthAMERICAN …National District Attorneys Association: $344,091 · Community ImprovementMARSHALL UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CORPORATION: $344,041 · Community Improvement+1 more: $18,486 · Community ImprovementTHE NATIONAL CENTER FOR THE PREVENTION OF COMMUNITY VIOLENCE: $387,511 · Human ServicesNAWLEE Foundation Inc: $17,630 · Human Services+1 more: $8,784 · Human ServicesTHE URBAN INSTITUTE: $301,642 · Social ScienceNATIONAL OPINION RESEARCH CENTER: $59,710 · Social ScienceUniversity of Kentucky Research Foundation: $99,357 · EducationJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $89,661 · EducationTHE MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN INC: $64,437 · Education
Other$22,418,742Crime & Legal$10,170,431Health$3,158,699Community Improvement$706,618Human Services$413,925Social Science$361,352Education$253,455

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 budgetIntegrated Justice Information Systems Institute Inc: $10,028,314 over 4y, 50% of budgetPORTER-STARKE SERVICES INC: $640,137 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetPrisma Health-Upstate: $480,226 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS MEMORIAL FUND INC: $414,316 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetST MARY'S REGIONAL HEALTH CENTER: $374,409 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetINTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CHIEFS OF POLICE: $360,295 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetWESTCARE TENNESSEE INC: $358,999 over 2y, 12% of budgetNATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF BLACK LAW ENFORCEMENT EXECUTIVES: $346,762 over 2y, 5.9% of budgetNational District Attorneys Association: $344,091 over 4y, 3.3% of budgetMARSHALL UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CORPORATION: $344,041 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetARKANSAS RURAL HEALTH PARTNERSHIP INC: $329,332 over 2y, 5.0% of budgetSMA HEALTHCARE INC: $313,209 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetTHE URBAN INSTITUTE: $301,642 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetMSTEPP INC: $273,274 over 2y, 58% of budgetNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $261,634 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetCoastlands Ministries: $230,046 over 2y, 15% of budgetWESTCHESTER-ELLENVILLE HOSPITAL INC: $218,925 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetAMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF SUICIDOLOGY: $170,188 over 2y, 6.7% of budgetFELLOWSHIP HOUSE INC: $154,453 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetNATIONAL SHERIFFS' ASSOCIATION: $110,535 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetUniversity of Kentucky Research Foundation: $99,357 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL POLICING INSTITUTE: $95,247 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $89,661 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOne Voice United Inc: $77,036 over 2y, 4.6% of budgetTHE MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN INC: $64,437 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL OPINION RESEARCH CENTER: $59,710 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLEGISLATIVE ANALYSIS & PUBLIC POLICY ASSOCIATION: $42,583 over 3y, 2.0% of budgetCOUNCIL ON ADDICTION PREVENTION AND EDUCATION OF DUTCHESS COUNTY INC: $38,597 over 1y, 5.0% of budgetSOUTHWESTERN BORDER SHERIFFS' COALITION: $27,731 over 1y, 20% of budgetCOUNCIL OF STATE GOVERNMENTS: $27,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetMAJOR CITIES CHIEFS ASSOCIATION: $26,905 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetCOLLABORATIVE SOLUTIONS FOR COMMUNITIES: $6,301 over 1y, 0.1% 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 Integrated Justice Information Systems Institute Inc ↗
  • Who funds PORTER-STARKE SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds Prisma Health-Upstate ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS MEMORIAL FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR THE PREVENTION OF COMMUNITY VIOLENCE ↗
  • Who funds ST MARY'S REGIONAL HEALTH CENTER ↗
  • Who funds INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CHIEFS OF POLICE ↗
  • Who funds WESTCARE TENNESSEE INC ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF BLACK LAW ENFORCEMENT EXECUTIVES ↗
  • Who funds National District Attorneys Association ↗
  • Who funds MARSHALL UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds ARKANSAS RURAL HEALTH PARTNERSHIP INC ↗
  • Who funds SMA HEALTHCARE INC ↗
  • Who funds THE URBAN INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds MSTEPP INC ↗

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.

Center for Technology and Civic LifeIL29.7× affinity22 shared granteesties to 9 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Center for Technology and Civic Life · Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists Inc · American Public Health Association · American Bar Association · National Environmental Health Association · National Recreation and Park Association · North American Association of Central Cancer Registries · National Foundation for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Inc · Association of Public Health Laboratories Inc · Investor Protection Trust · Association of Maternal and Child Health Programs · Association of State and Territorial Health Officials

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 The Institute for Intergovernmental Research Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Institute for Intergovernmental Research Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 12%
  • Johns Hopkins University: 12% of income from government
  • Sma Healthcare Inc: 8% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
6report 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 149 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 Institute for Intergovernmental Research’s filings →

More from the funding graph