Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →
Plinth

· Public charity

The Manufacturing Institute

THE MANUFACTURING INSTITUTE's mission is to build a resilient manufacturing workforce prepared for the challenges and opportunities of the future.

$150k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$150k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your fieldRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

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

Employment$443kEducation$138kScience & Tech$56kYouth Development$40kCommunity Improvement$20k
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$150,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$10M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JOBS FOR THE FUTURE INC$150,000
02The need
03

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY23–23, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%GIRLS INC OF ALAMEDA COUNTY: $10k → 10%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

Which US states your grants reach

WA
MN
IL
MI
MA
CA
UT
NE
VA
MD
KS
GA
TX
FL

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

04

Where the work is directed

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

About 10% of The Manufacturing Institute’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.

The Manufacturing Institutelessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address

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 foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your field

The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Girls Incorporated of Greater Indianapolis

Girls inc.'s mission is to inspire all girls to be strong, smart, and bold. in partnership with schools and community organizations, we focus on the development of the whole girl. she learns to value herself, take risks, and discover and…

Youth Development
2
Girls Incorporated of Metro Denver

To inspire all girls to be strong, smart, and bold.

Youth Development
3
Girl Scouts of Utah

Girl scouting builds girls of courage, confidence and character who make the world a better place.

Youth Development
4
Girls Incorporated of San Diego County

Girls inc. inspires all girls to be strong, smart, and bold. our comprehensive approach to whole girl development equips girls to nagivate gender, economic, and social barriers and grow up healthy, educated, and independent.

—
5
Girl Scouts of Western Washington

Girl scouting builds girls* of courage, confidence and character who make the world a better place.

Youth Development
6
Girls Inc of the Pacific Northwest

The mission of girls inc. of the pacific northwest inspires all girls to be strong, smart, and bold, providing girls across the region with life-changing experiences and solutions to the unique challenges girls face. girls inc. equips…

Youth Development
7
Girls Inc of Chattanooga

Girls inc. of chattanooga inspires and equips girls to be strong, smart and bold leaders within their families, their communities and society.

Youth Development
8
Girls Incorporated of Greater Santa Barbara

The organizations mission is to inspire all girls to be strong,smart, and bold, through research-based, innovative, and educational programs and activities.

—
9
Girl Scouts of Ne Kansas and Nw Missouri Inc

Our mission is to build girls of courage, confidence, and character who make the world a better place.

Youth Development
10
Girls in Stem
Human Services
11
Girl Scouts of Central Illinois

Girl scouts builds girls of courage, confidence, and character who make the world a better place.

—
12
Girls Incorporated of Metropolitan Dallas

In fiscal year 2025, girls inc. of metropolitan dallas empowered 4,610 unique girls from underserved communities through partnerships with 56 schools and community organizations across the dallas region. programs are built on the girls…

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Girls Inc of Chicago and the most unlike its peers is Players Philanthropy Fund Inc. 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 one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 15 of the 21 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
12/15
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

JOBS FOR THE FUTURE INC — $300,000 · EmploymentJOBS FOR THE FUTURE INCGOODWILL OF NORTH GEORGIA INC — $20,000 · EmploymentGOODWILL OF NORTH GEORGIA INC+1 more — $7,500 · EmploymentNATIONAL STUDENT CLEARINGHOUSE — $100,000 · EducationNATIONAL STUDENT …IURBAN TEEN — $10,000 · EducationIURBAN TEENMACOMB COMMUNITY COLLEGE — $15,000 · OtherMACOMB COMMUNIT…BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF GREATER SALT LAKE — $10,000 · OtherBOYS & GIRLS CL…SKILLS USA INC — $10,000 · OtherSKILLS USA INCSCHOOLCRAFT COLLEGE — $10,000 · OtherSCHOOLCRAFT COL…KELLOGG COMMUNITY COLLEGE — $10,000 · OtherKELLOGG COMMUNI…HOPE CENTER FOUNDATION — $10,000 · OtherHOPE CENTER FOU…Lansing Comm College — $7,900 · OtherLansing Comm Co…PLAYERS PHILANTHROPY FUND INC — $10,000 · OtherPLAYERS PHILANT…GIRLS INCORPORATED OF ALAMEDA COUNTY — $10,000 · OtherGIRLS INCORPORA…Northwestern University — $55,579 · Recreation & SportsNorthwest…CHRYSALIS MINISTRIES INC — $50,000 · Crime & LegalBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF THE TWIN CITIES — $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS INC OF CHICAGO — $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentGIRL SCOUTS SPIRIT OF NEBRASKA — $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS INCORPORATED OF OMAHA — $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentAMERICAN WELDING SOCIETY INC — $20,000 · Community Improvement
Employment$327,500Education$110,000Other$92,900Recreation & Sports$55,579Crime & Legal$50,000Youth Development$40,000Community Improvement$20,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetJOBS FOR THE FUTURE INC — $300,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetNATIONAL STUDENT CLEARINGHOUSE — $100,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetNorthwestern University — $55,579 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHRYSALIS MINISTRIES INC — $50,000 over 1y, 6.3% of budgetGOODWILL OF NORTH GEORGIA INC — $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF GREATER SALT LAKE — $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF THE TWIN CITIES — $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGIRLS INC OF CHICAGO — $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetGIRL SCOUTS SPIRIT OF NEBRASKA — $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPLAYERS PHILANTHROPY FUND INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetIURBAN TEEN — $10,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF ALAMEDA COUNTY — $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF OMAHA — $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetGOODWILL IND OF THE SOUTHERN RIVERS INC — $7,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them

A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

The Blackbaud Giving …American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Blackbaud Giving FundSC8.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Blackbaud Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization The Manufacturing Institute funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%your share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 11%
  • Jobs for the Future Inc — 11% of income from government
  • American Welding Society Inc — 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
typical government reliance, FY20–25

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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 21 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

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 camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines