Skip to content

· Public charity

The Youngstown Edison Business Incubator

Business development: to cultivate, accelerate and prmote the formation, growth, commercialization and innovation of technology-based businesses by providing the comprehensive, high quality entrepreneurial services and resoruces in a robust environment that promotes company success, attraction and retention to cultivate, accelerate and…

$614k
Granted FY2024still arriving
21
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$181k
Largest
01What it funds
0188% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Environment$2.1MEducation$1.6MScience & Tech$910kHealth$536kArts & Culture$185kCommunity Improvement$174kFood & Nutrition$170kYouth Development$45kOther$0
02FY2024 · 21 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 21 grants below total $453,300, the rows itemized in this filing. The $613,545 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $160,245 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.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k9 grants · $58k
  • $10k–50k10 grants · $149k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $246k
$11,850
Median grant
5
States reached
$16M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DEFENSE & ENERGY SYSTEMS LLC$181,335
BRITE ENERGY INNOVATORS$64,600
Individual grant recipient$34,983
Individual grant recipient$17,510
WATERLOX COATINGS CORPORATION$12,500
KIRALY TOOL AND DIE INC$12,500
XALOY$12,500
MAGNETIC ANALYSIS CORPORATION$12,500
ALLOY PRECISION TECHNOLOGIES INC$12,500
MARADYNE CORPORATION$12,500
Individual grant recipient$11,850
MAGNET$10,000
TEAMNEO FOUNDATION$9,000
Individual grant recipient$7,500
Individual grant recipient$7,500
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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 90% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%BY BANGER LLC: $30k → 11%ENGINEERED PRODUCTS: $58k → 11%PARAMOUNT PURSUITS: $35k → 10%THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY: $69k → 16%VALLOUREC STAR LP: $60k → 16%AMERICAN FOUNDRY SOCIETY INC: $68k → 16%CATALYSIS ADDITIVE TOOLING: $31k → 5%OPEN ADDITIVE LLC: $66k → 9%KENT STATE UNIVERSITY: $63k → 12%SLICE MFG LLC: $30k → 13%MICHAEL BIANCO: $28k → 19%LECS ENERGY LLC: $65k → 4%LASER DESIGN: $28k → 11%THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY: $59k → 16%AMERICAN FOUNDRY SOCIETY INC: $64k → 16%EVENT 38 UNMANNED SYSTEMS INC: $79k → 13%HUMTOWN PRODUCTS: $77k → 16%BRITE: $75k → 16%EVENT 38 UNMANNED SYSTEMS INC: $42k → 13%HUMTOWN PRODUCTS: $64k → 16%BRITE ENERGY INNOVATORS: $67k → 16%HUMTOWN PRODUCTS: $56k → 16%BRITE ENERGY INNOVATORS: $65k → 16%PARAMOUNT PURSUITS: $70k → 17%DEFENSE & ENERGY SYSTEMS LLC: $303k → 19%ELEMENT MATERIALS TECHNOLOGY CHICAGO: $36k → 7%HUMTOWN PRODUCTS: $52k → 16%PARAMOUNT PURSUITS: $33k → 17%DEFENSE & ENERGY SYSTEMS LLC: $181k → 19%MAGNAT: $33k → 17%VANTAGE SOLUTIONS: $45k → 19%TEAMNEO FOUNDATION: $31k → 17%YOUNGSTOWN STATE UNIVERSITY: $189k → 19%YOUNGSTOWN STATE UNIVERSITY: $121k → 19%YOUNGSTOWN STATE UNIVERSITY: $82k → 19%YOUNGSTOWN STATE UNIVERSITY: $70k → 19%YOUNGSTOWN STATE UNIVERSITY: $68k → 19%DEFENSE AND ENERGY SYSTEMS: $313k → 19%DEFENSE & ENERGY SYSTEMS LLC: $249k → 19%DEFENSE & ENERGY SYSTEMS LLC: $232k → 19%DEFENSE & ENERGY SYSTEMS LLC: $215k → 19%DEFENSE AND ENERGY SYSTEMS: $179k → 19%DEFENSE AND ENERGY SYSTEMS: $155k → 19%JUGGERBOT3D: $62k → 19%JUGGERBOT3D: $51k → 19%JUBBERBOT 3D: $39k → 19%HEALTHCARE ANALYTICS: $37k → 19%JUGGERBOT 3D: $34k → 19%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

MN
IL
MI
IA
OH
PA
NJ
MO
KY
DE
AZ
OK
GA
TX
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

83%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$5.0M · 26 repeat orgs$1.0M to everyone else

26 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2024, 20 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

26
39

Total granted

$5.0M
$853k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+48%
+69%

Still filing today

15%
5%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 67% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $148k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time
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

  • BE
    BRITE ENERGY INNOVATORS
    3× · 2020–2024 · $150k · revenue +78%
  • AF
    AMERICAN FOUNDRY SOCIETY
    2× · 2017–2018 · $131k · revenue +48%
  • TN
    Team NEO Foundation
    6× · 2017–2024 · $97k · revenue +35%

Funded once

  • B
    BRITE
    one grant, 2023 · $75k
  • J3
    JUBBERBOT 3D
    one grant, 2019 · $64k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2019 · $58k
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
Acec Research Institute

Leading source of knowledge and thought leadership for creating a more sustainable, safe, secure, and technically advanced built environment.

Unclassified
2
Nc State Engineering Foundation Inc

To aid and promote, by financial assistance and otherwise, educational, research, and extension in the college of engineering at north carolina state university

Education
3
Industrial Supply Association

Trade association for the industrial supply industry.

Community Improvement
4
Ohio Business Roundtable

To harness the collective expertise of ohio's ceos to advocate for policies that improve ohio's economic competitiveness.

—
5
American National Standards Institute

To enhance both the global competitiveness of u.s. business and the u.s. quality of life by promoting and facilitating voluntary consensus standards and conformity assessment systems, and safeguarding their integrity.

Public Benefit
6
Institute for Student Achievement
Education
7
Manufacturing Technology Deployment Group Inc

Manage and provide oversight and support of the national center for defense manufacturing and machining and the advanced manufacturing international, inc.

Science & Tech
8
The American College of Trust and

Association of trust and estate lawyers meeting the highest professional standards.

Community Improvement
9
Edison Electric Institute Inc

The edison electric institute (eei) is the association that represents all u.s. investor-owned electric companies. our members provide electricity for more than 250 million americans, and operate in all 50 states and the district of…

Community Improvement
10
International Institute of

Support professionalism, ethics, education, and research in the building enclosure industry.

Community Improvement
11
University of Illinois Foundation

The University of Illinois Foundation's corporate mission is to advance the interests and welfare of the University of Illinois. As stated in its Articles of Incorporation, the role of the Foundation is procuring private support on behalf…

Education
12
Edison Welding Institute

Advancing our customers' manufacturing competitiveness through innovation in joining and allied technologies

Employment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Advanced Methods in Innovation; the most unlike its peers is Brite Energy Innovators. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

6 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. 6 of the 80 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)
6/6
Grantees still filing
6/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DEFENSE & ENERGY SYSTEMS LLC: $1,179,946 · OtherDEFENSE & ENERGY SYSTEMS LLCUNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN IOWA: $852,206 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN IOWADEFENSE AND ENERGY SYSTEMS: $646,837 · OtherDEFENSE AND ENERGY SYSTEMSYOUNGSTOWN STATE UNIVERSITY: $378,018 · OtherYOUNGSTOWN STATE UNIVERSITY+72 more: $2,669,458 · Other+72 moreBRITE ENERGY INNOVATORS: $150,400 · Community ImprovementTeam NEO Foundation: $96,542 · Community ImprovementMANUFACTURING ADVOCACY & GROWTH NETWORK INC: $25,000 · Community ImprovementADVANCED METHODS IN INNOVATION: $12,122 · Community Improvement
Other$5,726,465Community Improvement$284,064

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBRITE ENERGY INNOVATORS: $150,400 over 3y, 4.3% of budgetAMERICAN FOUNDRY SOCIETY: $131,270 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetTeam NEO Foundation: $96,542 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetMANUFACTURING ADVOCACY & GROWTH NETWORK INC: $25,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetINVESTMENT CASTING INSTITUTE: $19,880 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetADVANCED METHODS IN INNOVATION: $12,122 over 1y, 5.1% 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 BRITE ENERGY INNOVATORS ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FOUNDRY SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds Team NEO Foundation ↗
  • Who funds MANUFACTURING ADVOCACY & GROWTH NETWORK INC ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The Youngstown Edison Business Incubator funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Youngstown Edison Business Incubator. 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%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report 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 80 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 Youngstown Edison Business Incubator’s filings →

    More from the funding graph