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

· Public charity

Calyx Institute

The Calyx Institute's purposes are 1) to develop the best practices standards for privacy, security and free speech in the telecommunications industry and on the Internet; and 2) Educating the general public and service providers on privacy, security and free speech practices.

$95k
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2024.

Public Benefit$178kCivil Rights$99kEducation$79kScience & Tech$30kArts & Culture$25kHuman Services$10kCrime & Legal$10kPhilanthropy$8k
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $45k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$25,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$9.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Distributed Denial of Secrets$50,000
Sunset Spark$25,000
Muslim Justic League$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 (FY22–22, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Center for Emerging Futures: $10k → 8%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
ID
IL
NY
MA
CT
CA
VA
DE
DC
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 6% of Calyx Institute’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Calyx Institutelessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 5.7% directed abroad (not shown)
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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

34%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$148k · 3 repeat orgs$282k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +51% since the first grant, against +36% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
13

Total granted

$148k
$237k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+51%
+36%

Still filing today

100%
85%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 53% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $45k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24
Civil RightsArts & CultureInternationalPublic BenefitCommunity ImprovementCrime & LegalOther
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

  • DD
    DISTRIBUTED DENIAL OF SECRETS
    4× · 2021–2024 · $107k · revenue +25% · 64% of their budget
  • A1
    ARTICLE 19 INC
    2× · 2021–2022 · $25k · revenue +51%
  • ST
    SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY OVERSIGHT PROJECT INC
    2× · 2021–2022 · $16k · revenue +73%

Funded once

  • DP
    DEMAND PROGRESS EDUCATION FUNDgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $65k · revenue +28%
  • BI
    BLACKS IN CYBERSECURITY HEADQUARTERS INCORPERATED
    one grant, 2023 · $54k
  • RT
    RESTORE THE FOURTH INC
    one grant, 2022 · $20k
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
Center for Democracy and Technology

Advocating for public policies that advance democratic values in the digital age.

Civil Rights
2
Brave New Software Project Inc

Brave New Software is dedicated to keeping the Internet open and decentralized. We build open source software tools that helps users access an uncensored internet, and create a more open and protected information infrastructure for us all.

Civil Rights
3
Electronic Privacy Information Center

Epic's mission is to secure the fundamental right to privacy in the digital age for all people through advocacy, research, and litigation.

Civil Rights
4
Freenet Project Inc

The Freenet Project develops and maintains free, open-source software that enables decentralized communication and information sharing, with the goal of promoting privacy, freedom of expression, and access to information for the public…

Civil Rights
5
Discourse Labs Inc

Discourse labs provides research-backed tools and resources for productive public dialogue. we believe people should have the tools, technology, and skills to engage in productive public dialogue using credible information.

—
6
Freedom of the Press Foundation

At freedom of the press foundation (fpf), our mission is to protect and defend press freedom in the 21st century. we do this through:1.) public advocacy on issues affecting press freedom, including government transparency, the right to…

Human Services
7
Electronic Frontier Foundation Inc

See Schedule OThe mission of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Inc. ("EFF") is to ensure that technology supports freedom, justice, and innovation for all people of the world.

—
8
Upturn Inc

Upturn advances equity and justice in the design, governance, and use of technology.

—
9
Digital Rights Foundation

Digital rights foundation is a registered research-based advocacy non-governmental organization focusing on information and communication technologies (icts) to support democratic processes and digital governance.

International
10
Mozilla Foundation

Mozilla foundation works with a broad movement of people, projects, and organizations to protect and improve the internet as a public resource. we strive to keep the internet open and accessible to all, and to promote more trustworthy…

Science & Tech
11
The Democracy Integrity Project

The democracy integrity project (tdip) is a 501(c)4 nonprofit that provides research on matters of public interest to government entities, media, and other nonprofits to educate the public on matters such as foreign election interference,…

Civil Rights
12
Democracy Works Inc

The organization's mission is to leverage web-technologies to improve civic engagement and voter education.

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Demand Progress Education Fund; the most unlike its peers is Sunset Spark Inc. 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

17 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. 17 of the 19 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
12/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DISTRIBUTED DENIAL OF SECRETS: $107,135 · Civil RightsDISTRIBUTED DENIAL OF SECRETSDEMAND PROGRESS EDUCATION FUND: $65,000 · Civil RightsDEMAND PROGRESS EDUCATION FUNDMUSLIM JUSTICE LEAGUE: $20,000 · Civil RightsMUSLIM JUSTICE LEAGUESURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY OVERSIGHT PROJECT INC: $16,000 · Civil RightsSURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY OVERSIGHT PROJECT INCDEFENDING RIGHTS AND DISSENT INC: $10,000 · Civil RightsBLACKS IN CYBERSECURITY HEADQUARTERS INCORPERATED: $53,990 · OtherBLACKS IN CYBERSECURITY HEADQUAR…RESTORE THE FOURTH INC: $20,000 · OtherRESTORE THE FOURTH INCLUCY PARSONS LABS: $10,000 · OtherLUCY PARSONS LABSSUPERBLOOM DESIGN: $10,000 · OtherSUPERBLOOM DESIGNEROTIC SERVICE PROVIDER LEGAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH: $10,000 · OtherEROTIC SERVICE PROVIDER LEGAL ED…FUND FOR THE CITY OF NEW YORK INC: $7,500 · OtherFUND FOR THE CITY OF NEW YORK IN…NEW VENTURE FUND: $7,500 · OtherNEW VENTURE FUNDTHE TOR PROJECT INC: $5,500 · OtherARTICLE 19 INC: $25,000 · InternationalSUNSET SPARK INC: $25,000 · EducationTHEOREM MEDIA INC: $15,000 · Arts & CultureIndependent Arts & Media: $10,000 · Arts & CultureCENTER FOR EMERGING FUTURES INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesTHE WATERSHED CENTER INC: $10,000 · Community Improvement
Civil Rights$218,135Other$124,490International$25,000Education$25,000Arts & Culture$25,000Human Services$10,000Community Improvement$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetDISTRIBUTED DENIAL OF SECRETS: $107,135 over 4y, 64% of budgetDEMAND PROGRESS EDUCATION FUND: $65,000 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetARTICLE 19 INC: $25,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetSUNSET SPARK INC: $25,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetMUSLIM JUSTICE LEAGUE: $20,000 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetSURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY OVERSIGHT PROJECT INC: $16,000 over 2y, 2.3% of budgetTHEOREM MEDIA INC: $15,000 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetCENTER FOR EMERGING FUTURES INC: $10,000 over 1y, 7.5% of budgetTHE WATERSHED CENTER INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetIndependent Arts & Media: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetLUCY PARSONS LABS: $10,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetSUPERBLOOM DESIGN: $10,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetDEFENDING RIGHTS AND DISSENT INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetEROTIC SERVICE PROVIDER LEGAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH: $10,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetFUND FOR THE CITY OF NEW YORK INC: $7,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND: $7,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE TOR PROJECT INC: $5,500 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

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 Ford FoundationNew Venture FundProteus Fund IncBorealis PhilanthropyAmalgamated Charitabl…Tides FoundationAmerican Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
The Ford FoundationNY16.2× affinity6 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ford Foundation · New Venture Fund · Proteus Fund Inc · Borealis Philanthropy · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Tides Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Calyx Institute funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Calyx Institute. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Calyx Institute?

    Find your warmest path to Calyx Institute through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 19 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.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2024, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Calyx 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