· Public charity
US Civilian Research & Development Foundation
Crdf global facilitates scientific collaborations between countries, promotes safe and responsible science, encourages entrepreneurship that supports economic growth, and improves the capacity of individual scientists and institutions.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 85% of US CIVILIAN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 4 grants below total $382,056 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $3,222,284 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $2,840,228 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k2 grants · $56k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $326k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NOBLE SUPPLY & LOGISTICS | $174,044 |
| INSIGHT PUBLIC SECTOR INC | $152,242 |
| EQUUS COMPUTE SOLUTIONS | $43,770 |
| WRAP INC | $12,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 83% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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
Grants abroad, by region — $2.8M on the FY2024 return
Schedule F, as filed: 8 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: CAPACITY BUILDING
Stated purpose: CAPACITY BUILDING
Stated purpose: CAPACITY BUILDING
Stated purpose: CAPACITY BUILDING
Stated purpose: CAPACITY BUILDING
Stated purpose: CAPACITY BUILDING
Stated purpose: CAPACITY BUILDING
Stated purpose: CAPACITY BUILDING
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. 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.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +47% since the first grant, against +43% for the ones you funded once.
25 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 24 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 46% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $208k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- ISINTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR INFECTIOUS DISEASES INC2× · 2017–2021 · $133k · revenue +30%
- TRThe Research Foundation for The State University of New York2× · 2017–2018 · $65k · revenue +62%
SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY2× · 2018–2019 · $50k · revenue +40%
Funded once
- ACAMERICAN COUNCILS FOR INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION ACTR ACCELS INCgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $151k · revenue +43%
- UOUNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA MEone grant, 2022 · $92k
- UOUNIVERSITY OF ARIZONAone grant, 2018 · $47k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
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…
The mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…
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.
Dartmouth College educates the most promising students and prepares them for a lifetime of learning and of responsible leadership, through a faculty dedicated to teaching and the creation of knowledge.
The central mission of the university of southern california is the development of human beings and society as a whole through the cultivation and enrichment of the human mind and spirit. the principal means by which our mission is…
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…
Aascu is a washington, d.c. based higher education association that represents the sector of over 500 regional public colleges, universities, and systems whose members share a learning and teaching centered culture, a commitment to…
Case Western Reserve University is an independent, research-oriented university with broadly based strengths in health, including medicine, nursing and dentistry; in engineering; in the arts and sciences; and in law, management and social…
Education and Research
Arcadia university's pioneering, global, integrated, liberal arts, and professional learning experience cultivates leaders who are intellectually fearless and uniquely prepared for life and work. our highly regarded, values-based learning…
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…
The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sacred Heart University Incorporated and the most unlike its peers is Wrap Project Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 62 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
16 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. 16 of the 67 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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.
- Who funds AMERICAN COUNCILS FOR INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION ACTR ACCELS INC ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR INFECTIOUS DISEASES INC ↗
- Who funds The Research Foundation for The State University of New York ↗
- Who funds SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL IMPLEMENTATION SOLUTIONS ↗
- Who funds Cornell University ↗
- Who funds COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Middlebury College ↗
- Who funds THE JAMES G MARTIN CENTER FOR ACADEMIC RENEWAL ↗
- Who funds THE UNIVERSITY CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds DREXEL UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds SACRED HEART UNIVERSITY INCORPORATED ↗
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.
Open a dossier: National Collegiate Athletic Association · Folds of Honor Foundation · Tulsa Community 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 US Civilian Research & Development Foundation 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.
- Wrap Project Inc — 64% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Middlebury College — 1% of income from government
- Sacred Heart University Incorporated — 1% of income from government
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.