Skip to content

· Public charity

The Institute for New Economic Thinking Inc

The institute for new economic thinking, inc.

$474k
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$150k
Largest
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Education$2.4MScience & Tech$367kHealth$166kPublic Benefit$164kSocial Science$129kCrime & Legal$99kEnvironment$96kCommunity Improvement$90kOther$0
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $219,497, the rows itemized in this filing. The $474,371 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $254,874 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.
$149,997
Median grant
2
States reached
$9.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE ACADEMIC-INDUSTRY RESEARCH NETWORK$149,997
UNIVERSITY OF UTAH$69,500
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.

US giving: 66% of grant dollars ($2.4M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 35% that went abroad ($1.3M) is mapped below.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY22–22, $6k) 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. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%THE CAPITAL INSTITUTE: $6k → 9%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
IL
MI
NY
MA
OH
PA
CT
CA
UT
VA
DE
TN
DC
TX
FL

Beyond the US: 35% of all-years giving ($1.3M)

6 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
United Kingdom$960k · 4 grants
Italy$99k · 5 grants
Netherlands$96k · 1 grant
Germany$63k · 3 grants
France$50k · 1 grant
India$15k · 1 grant

Grants abroad, by region: $213k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 8 regions, $118k to organizations and $95k 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)$93k · 44% · 3 grants · 10 people

Stated purpose: PLURALIST CERTIFICATE · GLOBALIZATION MEETS AUSTERITY · SUMMIT

Central America and the Caribbean$50k · 23% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: ECONOMICS OF THE CLIMATE TRANSITION

Sub-Saharan Africa$25k · 12% · 17 people

Stated purpose: PROJECT GRANT

South America$23k · 11% · 8 people

Stated purpose: EVENT GRANT

East Asia and the Pacific$10k · 5% · 4 people

Stated purpose: YSI EVENT GRANT/PROJECT SPONSORSHIP

South Asia$9k · 4% · 5 people

Stated purpose: YSI EVENT GRANT/PROJECT SPONSORSHIP

Middle East and North Africa$2k · 1% · 1 person

Stated purpose: YSI EVENT GRANT/PROJECT SPONSORSHIP

North America (Canada and Mexico)$350 · 0% · 1 person

Stated purpose: HONORAIA

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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain. 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.
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 22% of The Institute for New Economic Thinking Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

The Institute for New Economic Thinking Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 35% 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.

33%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.0M · 4 repeat orgs$2.1M to everyone else

4 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
34

Total granted

$1.0M
$2.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-3%
+33%

Still filing today

75%
24%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
EducationCommunity ImprovementInternationalHuman ServicesOther
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

  • TA
    THE ACADEMIC-INDUSTRY RESEARCH NETWORK
    5× · 2020–2024 · $516k · revenue -3% · 89% of their budget
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF UTAH
    5× · 2020–2024 · $224k
  • NY
    New York University
    2× · 2020–2022 · $197k · revenue +45%

Funded once

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE
    one grant, 2020 · $750k
  • University of Chicagograduated
    one grant, 2020 · $325k · revenue +52%
  • SU
    STITCHING UNIVERSITY EUROPEAN CLIMATE FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2020 · $96k
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
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
2
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
3
University of Miami

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

Education
4
Drexel University

Drexel university fulfills its founder's vision of preparing each new generation of students for productive professional and civic lives while also focusing its collective expertise on solving society's greatest problems. drexel is an…

Education
5
Chancellor Masters & Scholars of the University of Oxford

The principal objects of the University are the advancement of learning by teaching and research, and its dissemination by every means. We work as one Oxford bringing together our staff, students and alumni, our colleges, faculties,…

—
6
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education
7
Bar Ilan University in Israel Inc

Biu produces students who excel in the sciences, humanities, law, engineering, business & the arts.

—
8
Trustees of Tufts College

Education and Research

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
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
11
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
12
The Central European University

Ceu is committed to promoting the values of open society and self-reflective critical thinking. it aims at excellence in the mastery of established knowledge, courage to pursue the creation of new knowledge in the humanities, the social…

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of Chicago; the most unlike its peers is The Academic-Industry Research Network. 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

15 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. 15 of the 42 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
10/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE: $750,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGEUNIVERSITY OF UTAH: $224,300 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF UTAHSTITCHING UNIVERSITY EUROPEAN CLIMATE FOUNDATION: $96,484 · OtherSTITCHING UNIVERSITY EUROPEAN CLIMATE FOUNDATIONLONDON BUSINESS SCHOOL: $94,998 · OtherLONDON BUSINESS SCHOOLUCL FRIENDS AND ALUMNI ASSOCIATION INC: $82,675 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF OXFORD: $64,605 · Other+22 more: $465,427 · Other+22 moreTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK: $546,701 · EducationTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN T…University of Chicago: $325,000 · EducationUniversity of ChicagoNew York University: $196,580 · EducationNew York UniversityBENTLEY UNIVERSITY: $50,000 · EducationTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $50,000 · Education+6 more: $158,918 · Education+6 moreTHE ACADEMIC-INDUSTRY RESEARCH NETWORK: $515,854 · Community ImprovementTHE ACADEMIC-IN…CENTER FOR ECONOMIC AND POLICY RESEARCH: $89,375 · InternationalCAPITAL INSTITUTE: $6,000 · Human Services
Other$1,778,489Education$1,327,199Community Improvement$515,854International$89,375Human Services$6,000

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 budgetTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK: $546,701 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ACADEMIC-INDUSTRY RESEARCH NETWORK: $515,854 over 5y, 89% of budgetUniversity of Chicago: $325,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNew York University: $196,580 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCENTER FOR ECONOMIC AND POLICY RESEARCH: $89,375 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetBENTLEY UNIVERSITY: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCornell University: $40,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe George Washington University: $37,485 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetResearch Foundation of the City University of New York: $28,350 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLOYOLA MARYMOUNT UNIVERSITY: $26,083 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS RIO GRANDE VALLEY FOUNDATION: $21,002 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $12,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCAPITAL INSTITUTE: $6,000 over 1y, 0.8% 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 THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
  • Who funds THE ACADEMIC-INDUSTRY RESEARCH NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds University of Chicago ↗
  • Who funds New York University ↗
  • Who funds CENTER FOR ECONOMIC AND POLICY RESEARCH ↗
  • Who funds BENTLEY UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA ↗
  • Who funds Cornell University ↗
  • Who funds The George Washington University ↗
  • Who funds Research Foundation of the City University of New York ↗
  • Who funds LOYOLA MARYMOUNT UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS RIO GRANDE VALLEY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
  • Who funds President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The Institute for New Economic Thinking Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Institute for New Economic Thinking Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College: 7% of income from government
  • Bentley University: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get 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 · 0–40%
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 Institute for New Economic Thinking Inc?

Find your warmest path to The Institute for New Economic Thinking 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 42 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 Institute for New Economic Thinking’s filings →

More from the funding graph