Skip to content
California Emerging Technology Fund at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

California Emerging Technology Fund

Provide leadership statewide to minimize the Digital Divide by accelerating the deployment and adoption of broadband and advanced communications to unserved and underserved communities.

$4.1M
Granted FY2025still arriving
55
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$1.9M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its 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 2025.

Education$5.4MCommunity Improvement$3.8MHuman Services$2.2MPublic Benefit$1.7MHealth$665kPhilanthropy$510kEmployment$344kEnvironment$250kOther$0
02FY2025 · 55 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k47 grants · $952k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $365k
  • $250k+2 grants · $2.7M
$20,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$12M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
School2Home (multiple partners)$1,867,230
AGIF Education Foundation$879,510
Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation$120,000
Sigma Beta Xi$78,710
Valley Vision$66,000
County of Sonoma$50,000
Southern California Association of Governments$50,000
Sourtheast Community Development Corporation$30,265
Sierra Business Council$30,000
Economic Development Collaborative$30,000
County of Inyo$30,000
Tech Exchange$26,000
Latinas Contra Cancer$24,525
County of Napa$20,000
City of Rosemead$20,000
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 (FY17–25, $679k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 89% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%DELHI CENTER: $80k → 10%INFOLINE OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY: $50k → 11%INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTERS OF KERN COUNTY: $30k → 18%MRELIEF: $50k → 14%DELHI CENTER: $960 → 10%ASIAN YOUTH CENTER: $11k → 10%Binational of Central California: $7k → 19%SACRED HEART COMMUNITY SERVICE: $10k → 8%CALIFORNIA FOUNDATION FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTERS: $25k → 12%VIETNAMESE VOLUNTARY FOUNDATION INC: $13k → 8%SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $120k → 14%CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY: $25k → 8%SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORP: $45k → 14%Catholic Charities of Santa Clara County: $14k → 8%Sourtheast Community Development Corporation: $30k → 14%CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY: $10k → 8%SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $25k → 14%SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $25k → 14%SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $25k → 14%Southeast Community Development Corp: $15k → 14%SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORP: $10k → 14%SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $10k → 14%ASIAN YOUTH CENTER: $48k → 14%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.
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.

62%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$9.3M · 42 repeat orgs$5.8M to everyone else

42 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2025, 30 since wound down; 42 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

42
61

Total granted

$9.3M
$3.0M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+6%
+58%

Still filing today

64%
44%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 31% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2.8M went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesEducationCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitHealthHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • WI
    WORLD INSTITUTE ON DISABILITY
    3× · 2018–2020 · $535k · revenue +54%
  • CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY FRESNO FOUNDATION
    5× · 2021–2025 · $520k · revenue +65%
  • SB
    SIGMA BETA XI INC
    4× · 2019–2025 · $425k · revenue +176% · 29% of their budget

Funded once

  • H
    Human-I-Tgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $288k · revenue +750%
  • #(
    #OAKLANDUNDIVIDED (CITY OF OAKLAND)(OAKLAND PUBLIC EDUCATION FUND)
    one grant, 2021 · $270k
  • NEXTGEN CLIMATE AMERICA INC
    one grant, 2023 · $250k · revenue +22%
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
The California Channel

To distribute public affairs and other educational information in order to create an electronic bridge between californians and their public officials, and, in the process educate a new generation of voting citizens and civic leaders who…

—
2
Community Development Technologies Center

To build livable and economically viable communities in the low income areas of This is accomplished by Greater Los Angeles strengthening the skils and self-sufficiency of residents, businesses of residents, businesses and community…

Community Improvement
3
California Donor Table

California Donor Table anchors a hub of donors, foundations, and community leaders. We pool together our resources to shape California into a truly democratic state that works for the people, not the powerful. Rooted in our commitment to…

Civil Rights
4
California Chamber of Commerce

Represent members and cal employers to members of cal legislature and other agencies of state government through in-house legislative analysts, lobbying staff, and contract lobbyists. cal chamber publishes books and software related to…

—
5
Economic Development Coalition

To actively promote economic development in southwest riverside county while working with various cities, the county of riverside and the local chambers of commerce.

—
6
Water Education for Latino Leaders

Well educates and trains local latino elected officials about california water policy to promote timely and equitable actions that serve to develop a robust economy, healthy communities, and a resilient environment for all californians.

Human Services
7
California Community Economic Development Association

California community economic development association (cceda) is a non-profit corporation comprised of community based organizations and individuals involved in economic developement activities.

Community Improvement
8
San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council Afl-Cio

The Labor Council offers an avenue for local unions to come together as one group.

—
9
The City of Los Angeles Workforce Development Board

The Workforce Development Board promotes workforce development activitieswhich connect Los Angeles jobseekers and youth to training, workforce preparedness and employment opportunities. Facilitates placing youth into private,public &…

—
10
League of California Community Foundations

The league of california community foundations promotes and strengthens community foundations in california. through collaboration and shared learning among member foundations and building partnerships with private and public entities, we…

Philanthropy
11
The American Institute of Architects California

The AIA California, in collaboration with local components, is the voice of the architectural profession.

—
12
Instituto De Educacion Popular Del Sur De California

strengthening the leadership and workforce skills of Day Laborers and Domestic Workers. through 5 Day Labor Centers, Workers Health Program & Mujeres en Accion using Education & outreach empowerment tools

Unclassified
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is California Counties Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Orange County Education and Research Institute. 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

63 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. 63 of the 145 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
19
Early backer (in before they grew)
60/63
Grantees still filing
39/63
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

School2Home (multiple partners): $1,867,230 · OtherSchool2Home (multiple partners)WORLD INSTITUTE ON DISABILITY: $535,000 · OtherWORLD INSTITUTE ON DISABILITYAGIF EDUCATION FOUNDATION OF SANTA MARIA: $441,960 · OtherSOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS: $430,000 · OtherTECH EXCHANGE (OAKLAND PUBLIC EDUCATION FUND): $425,000 · OtherCOUNTY SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION OF CALIF: $350,000 · Other+102 more: $5,146,829 · Other+102 moreAMERICAN GI FORUM EDUCATION FOUNDATION OF SANTA MARIA CALIF: $2,032,680 · EducationAMERICAN GI FORUM EDUC…CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY FRESNO FOUNDATION: $519,760 · EducationCALIFORNIA STATE UNIVE…Sierra Business Council: $155,000 · Education+7 more: $280,000 · Education+7 moreUNITED WAYS OF CALIFORNIA: $410,000 · Community ImprovementVALLEY VISION: $323,500 · Community ImprovementIMPERIAL VALLEY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COR: $145,000 · Community ImprovementMONTEREY BAY ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP INC: $120,000 · Community ImprovementECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COLLABORATIVE- VENTURA COUNTY: $55,000 · Community Improvement+2 more: $30,000 · Community ImprovementSIGMA BETA XI INC: $424,840 · Public BenefitINLAND EMPIRE REGIONAL BROADBAND CONSORTIUM: $175,000 · Public BenefitWICONDUIT: $100,000 · Public BenefitCALIFORNIA FORWARD: $75,000 · Public BenefitCONNECT TO COMPETE INC: $50,000 · Public Benefit+2 more: $38,000 · Public BenefitSOUTHEAST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $305,175 · Human ServicesDELHI CENTER: $81,000 · Human ServicesASIAN YOUTH CENTER: $58,560 · Human ServicesmRelief: $50,000 · Human ServicesINFO LINE OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY: $50,000 · Human ServicesCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY: $49,175 · Human ServicesCALIFORNIA FOUNDATION FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTERS: $25,000 · Human Services+4 more: $34,660 · Human ServicesNEXTGEN CLIMATE AMERICA INC: $250,000 · EnvironmentUNITED WAY INC: $100,000 · Philanthropy
Other$9,196,019Education$2,987,440Community Improvement$1,083,500Public Benefit$862,840Human Services$653,570Environment$250,000Philanthropy$100,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetAMERICAN GI FORUM EDUCATION FOUNDATION OF SANTA MARIA CALIF: $2,032,680 over 2y, 67% of budgetWORLD INSTITUTE ON DISABILITY: $535,000 over 3y, 17% of budgetCALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY FRESNO FOUNDATION: $519,760 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetSIGMA BETA XI INC: $424,840 over 4y, 29% of budgetUNITED WAYS OF CALIFORNIA: $410,000 over 2y, 17% of budgetCOUNTY SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION OF CALIF: $350,000 over 2y, 2.2% of budgetVALLEY VISION: $323,500 over 6y, 4.3% of budgetSOUTHEAST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $305,175 over 7y, 9.3% of budgetHuman-I-T: $288,000 over 1y, 9.4% of budgetNEXTGEN CLIMATE AMERICA INC: $250,000 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetBIZFED INSTITUTE: $220,000 over 2y, 24% of budgetINLAND EMPIRE REGIONAL BROADBAND CONSORTIUM: $175,000 over 2y, 38% of budgetSierra Business Council: $155,000 over 3y, 4.3% of budgetIMPERIAL VALLEY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COR: $145,000 over 3y, 19% of budgetMONTEREY BAY ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP INC: $120,000 over 2y, 6.5% of budgetECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY: $120,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetCHICANA FOUNDATION OF NORTHERN CA DBA CHICANA LATINA FOUNDATION: $110,000 over 2y, 21% of budgetRise Economy: $100,000 over 2y, 4.2% of budgetUNITED WAY INC: $100,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetWICONDUIT: $100,000 over 2y, 25% of budgetEL CONCILIO OF SAN MATEO COUNTY: $90,000 over 2y, 4.4% of budgetDELHI CENTER: $81,000 over 2y, 8.7% of budgetREADING AND BEYOND: $75,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetCALIFORNIA FORWARD: $75,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR THE LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY COLLEGES: $70,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetFAMILIES IN SCHOOLS: $70,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetCALIFORNIA CONGRESS OF PARENTS TEACHERS AND STUDENTS INC: $60,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetASIAN YOUTH CENTER: $58,560 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COLLABORATIVE- VENTURA COUNTY: $55,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetmRelief: $50,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetINFO LINE OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY: $50,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCONNECT TO COMPETE INC: $50,000 over 2y, 3.8% of budgetSCHOOLS HEALTH AND LIBRARIES BROADBAND COALITION: $50,000 over 1y, 6.4% of budgetCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY: $49,175 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetInsure the Uninsured Project: $40,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetLATINAS CONTRA CANCER: $34,525 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetOAKLAND TECH EXCHANGE: $26,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetRadio Bilingue Inc: $25,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetPARTNERS IN CARE FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE GREENLINING INSTITUTE: $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCALIFORNIA COMMUNITY BUILDERS INC: $25,000 over 1y, 8.8% of budgetNATIONAL DIGITAL INCLUSION ALLIANCE: $25,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetNEWSTART HOUSING CORPORATION INC: $25,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetCALIFORNIA FOUNDATION FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTERS: $25,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetCALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF COUNCILS OF GOVERNMENTS: $25,000 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetEQUALITECH: $20,590 over 1y, 18% of budgetCALIFORNIA COUNTIES FOUNDATION: $20,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetMOTHERS HELPING OTHERS: $18,000 over 1y, 6.0% 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.

  • Who funds AMERICAN GI FORUM EDUCATION FOUNDATION OF SANTA MARIA CALIF ↗
  • Who funds WORLD INSTITUTE ON DISABILITY ↗
  • Who funds CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY FRESNO FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SIGMA BETA XI INC ↗
  • Who funds UNITED WAYS OF CALIFORNIA ↗
  • Who funds COUNTY SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION OF CALIF ↗
  • Who funds VALLEY VISION ↗
  • Who funds SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds Human-I-T ↗
  • Who funds NEXTGEN CLIMATE AMERICA INC ↗
  • Who funds BIZFED INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds INLAND EMPIRE REGIONAL BROADBAND CONSORTIUM ↗
  • Who funds Sierra Business Council ↗
  • Who funds IMPERIAL VALLEY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COR ↗
  • Who funds MONTEREY BAY ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP INC ↗
  • Who funds ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds CHICANA FOUNDATION OF NORTHERN CA DBA CHICANA LATINA FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Rise Economy ↗
  • Who funds UNITED WAY INC ↗
  • Who funds WICONDUIT ↗
  • Who funds EL CONCILIO OF SAN MATEO COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds DELHI CENTER ↗

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 California Endowm…Kaiser Foundation Hos…California Community …Weingart FoundationPublic Health Institu…The California Wellne…The San Francisco Fou…California Fire Found…Sierra Health Foundat…The James Irvine Foun…The Eli and Edythe Br…California Healthcare…
The California EndowmentCA38.1× affinity22 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The California Endowment · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · California Community Foundation · Weingart Foundation · Public Health Institute · The California Wellness Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · California Fire Foundation · Sierra Health Foundation Center for Health Program Management · The James Irvine Foundation · The Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation · California Healthcare 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 California Emerging Technology Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from California Emerging Technology Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%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
    25report 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 145 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on California Emerging Technology’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