Skip to content
The Manufacturing Institute at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· 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 it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
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.

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

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

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

Its 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. Its 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
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

WA
MN
IL
MI
MA
CA
UT
NE
VA
MD
KS
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 10% of The Manufacturing Institute’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

The Manufacturing Institutelessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
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 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
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
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.

—
4
Girl Scouts of Utah

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

Youth Development
5
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.

—
6
Girls in Stem
Human Services
7
Girls Inc of Greater Philadelphia and Southern New Jersey

Our mission is to inspire all girls to be strong, smart and bold through direct service and advocacy. in partnership with schools and at our girls inc. center, we focus on the development of the whole girl. she learns to value herself,…

—
8
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
9
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
10
Girl Talk Inc

We inspire all girls to be confident leaders through peer-to-peer mentoring programs.

—
11
Girl Scouts of Central Illinois

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

—
12
Female Strong

Female strong is a 501c3 non-profit organization and a community of committed individuals that offer hands-on programs, mentorship, and experiences that build confidence in middle and high school girls. we support the inclusion of all…

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Girls Inc of Chicago; the most unlike its peers is National Student Clearinghouse. 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 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
12/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and 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…HOPE CENTER FOUNDATION: $10,000 · OtherHOPE CENTER FOU…SKILLS USA INC: $10,000 · OtherSKILLS USA INCBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF GREATER SALT LAKE: $10,000 · OtherBOYS & GIRLS CL…KELLOGG COMMUNITY COLLEGE: $10,000 · OtherKELLOGG COMMUNI…SCHOOLCRAFT COLLEGE: $10,000 · OtherSCHOOLCRAFT COL…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 & LegalGIRL SCOUTS SPIRIT OF NEBRASKA: $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF THE TWIN CITIES: $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS INCORPORATED OF OMAHA: $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS INC OF CHICAGO: $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 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 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 budgetPLAYERS PHILANTHROPY FUND INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetIURBAN TEEN: $10,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF GREATER SALT LAKE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetGIRL SCOUTS SPIRIT OF NEBRASKA: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF ALAMEDA COUNTY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF THE TWIN CITIES: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF OMAHA: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetGIRLS INC OF CHICAGO: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetGOODWILL IND OF THE SOUTHERN RIVERS INC: $7,500 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.

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.

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

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's 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
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 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Manufacturing Institute’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