Loading…
Loading…
Arizona · Nonprofit
MUSICAL INSTRUMENT MUSEUM (Arizona) is funded by 102 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $118,007,532 in grants to it, the largest being Goldman Sachs Philanthropy Fund ($112,875,000). 55 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
MUSICAL INSTRUMENT MUSEUM runs a healthier operating margin than three-quarters of the 552 arts & culture nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 552 arts & culture nonprofits $10M–$100M, FY2024
Revenue, expenses and net assets — each indexed to 100 at its first filing year, so you read the trajectory, not the magnitude. The shaded band is where the middle 50% of its peers' revenue would sit, given their growth.
$174k from 10 funders in 2025, up from $8.7M and 13 in 2017.
21 of 102 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 97% of grant dollars received. That money is really individual donors directing a sponsor; the institutions to cultivate are the non-DAF funders.
From the IRS filings of MUSICAL INSTRUMENT MUSEUM’s funders (the co-funder graph). Top 30 of 102 funders by total. Association, not causation.
MUSICAL INSTRUMENT MUSEUM leans on a few funders — its largest provides 96% of grant income and the top three 97%; half comes from just 1 funder.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 1 funder to its left
Largest funder’s share by year: 2017 99% · 2018 94% · 2019 95% · 2020 96% · 2021 98% · 2022 91% · 2023 94% · 2024 96% · 2025 57% — diversifying over time.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
44% of MUSICAL INSTRUMENT MUSEUM's funders are still giving 3 years after their first grant; 54% give in more than one year at all.
Share of funders still giving k years after their first recorded grant, pooled across every acquisition cohort. A funder counts as retained in a year only if it made a grant that year.
MUSICAL INSTRUMENT MUSEUM draws 99% of its grant income from funders outside Arizona — its reputation reaches beyond the state, across 26 states in all.
In-state vs out-of-state, by year
Grantmakers that don’t fund you yet, surfaced two ways: they back organizations that share your funders, or their grantees resemble your mission. The ones both signals agree on come first. Your 102 funders put you under-funded among the 400 organizations that share them.
From the co-funder graph (funders backing at least two comparable organizations, shrunk for grantee count, donor-advised and mega-funds excluded) and the universe embeddings. A research starting point; overlap is association, not a guarantee of fit.
Grants and contracts to this organization from federal (USASpending) and state checkbooks, reconciled to its EIN. $68k on record.
Federal grants vs contracts are distinguished; state line items keep their reported category. Matched by name + geography (the BMF), so coverage is partial and precision-first.
Nonprofits whose mission and program text most resemble this one, by semantic similarity over the universe of US filings — the closest peers, and often the clearest route to shared or prospective funders.
Read directly from this organization’s own Form 990, as neutral context.
83% of spending goes to programs.
92%
Share of support from the public (Schedule A) — the basis for its public-charity status.
Operates in 2 states
Every figure is read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML — this organization’s own return for FY2024 (financials across 2018–2024), and the filings of 102funders that report grants to it. “On record” means captured in the filings we have parsed — a funder that does not e-file, or whose grant detail is not itemized, will not appear. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind. view filing