Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Cisco Systems Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$18M
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$611k
Largest
01What you fund
0184% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Philanthropy$31MEducation$11MInternational$875kHousing & Shelter$427kYouth Development$299kEnvironment$275kHealth$265kScience & Tech$251kOther$0
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 2 grants below total $1,221,200 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $18,398,341 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $17,177,141 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.

$610,600
Median grant
1
States reached
$243M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
America Online Giving Foundation$610,600
America Online Giving Foundation$610,600
02The need
03

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 12% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%America Online Giving Foundation: $3.0M → 10%See Statement 18: $25.8M → 8%Bright Funds Foundation: $12.0M → 10%America Online Giving Foundation: $611k → 10%See Statement 19: $23.5M → 8%See Statement 19: $21.6M → 8%See Statement 18: $18.6M → 8%See Statement 19: $17.1M → 8%See Statement 18: $12.4M → 8%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

03Your field

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.

1
Habitat for Humanity Inc

Habitat seeks to eliminate poverty housing from the world and to make decent shelter a matter of conscience and action.

2
Habitat for Humanity Greater San Francisco

Habitat for humanity greater san francisco builds and sustains affordable homeownership opportunities for families in marin, san francisco and san mateo counties.

3
Habitat for Humanity of Washington and Dodge Counties Wisconsin Inc

Habitat for humanity of washington dodge counties, wisconsin, inc. is a locally-run affiliate of habitat for humanity international, a nonprofit ecumenical christian housing ministry. habitat for humanity works in partnership with people…

4
Habitat for Humanity of Greater Los Angeles

Habitat for humanity of greater los angeles brings people together to build homes, communities and hope to realize our vision of a world where everyone has a decent place to live.

Housing & Shelter
5
Habitat for Humanity East Bay Silicon Valley

We believe everyone deserves a decent place to live. by building, preserving, and expanding fair access to affordable homeownership, habitat partners with people and families to build strong futures on the foundation of a stable home.

Housing & Shelter
6
Fort Collins Habitat for Humanity

Seeking to put god's love into action; habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, communities, and hope to realize our vision of a world where everyone has a decent place to live. fort collins habitat for humanity adheres…

Housing & Shelter
7
Habitat for Humanity International Chemung County

Chemung county habitat is dedicated to eliminating substandard housing locally and worldwide through constructing, rehabilitating and preserving homes; by advocating for fair and just housing policies; and by providing training and access…

8
Earthenable Inc

Earthenable works to solve the housing crisis in africa by revolutionizing the rural housing industry through innovative, affordable, and sustainable home-building solutions. its mission is to create healthier, safer, and climate-resilient…

International
9
Habitat for Humanity of Minnesota Inc

Habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, community, and hope. through advocacy, collaboration, and leadership, hfh-mn advances the work of minnesota's habitat for humanity affiliates to create and preserve affordable…

10
Greater Green Bay Habitat for Humanity

Habitat brings people together to build homes, communities and hope. the organization seeks out qualified applicants starting with a yearly application process for individuals and families to apply. the applicant must meet 3 basic…

11
Habitat for Humanity - Midohio

Seeking to put god's love into action, habitat for humanity-midohio brings people together to inspire hope, build homes, empower families, and develop communities.

12
Habitat for Humanity of La Plata County Inc

To build decent, affordable homes in partnership with families in need.

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Habitat for Humanity of Wake County Inc and the most unlike its peers is Monterey Bay Aquarium Foundation. 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

20 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 20 of the 72 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
13/20
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

BRIGHT FUNDS FOUNDATION — $23,931,340 · PhilanthropyBRIGHT FUNDS FOUNDATIONAMERICAN ONLINE GIVING FOUNDATION INC — $3,610,600 · PhilanthropyAMERICAN ONLINE GIVING FOUNDATION INCBENEFICENT TECHNOLOGY INC — $10,871,590 · Human ServicesBENEFICENT TECHNOLOGY INC+1 more — $100,000 · Human ServicesAmerica Online Giving Foundation — $3,610,600 · OtherAmerica Online G…Opportunity International ($300K for $500K from DAF) — $300,000 · OtherLiving Goods (formerly InnoVision Shelter Network) — $250,000 · OtherMedic Mobile Inc — $250,000 · Other+59 more — $2,332,683 · Other+59 moreCITIZEN SCHOOLS INC — $415,000 · EducationDream Catchers Inc — $15,000 · EducationUSHAHIDI INC — $225,000 · InternationalNETHOPE INC — $200,000 · Public Safety & DisasterINNOVATIONS FOR POVERTY ACTION A NONPROFIT CORPORATION — $150,000 · Social Science
Philanthropy$27,541,940Human Services$10,971,590Other$6,743,283Education$430,000International$225,000Public Safety & Disaster$200,000Social Science$150,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetBRIGHT FUNDS FOUNDATION — $23,931,340 over 1y, 28% of budgetBENEFICENT TECHNOLOGY INC — $10,871,590 over 1y, 79% of budgetAMERICAN ONLINE GIVING FOUNDATION INC — $3,610,600 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetCITIZEN SCHOOLS INC — $415,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetUSHAHIDI INC — $225,000 over 1y, 10% of budgetNETHOPE INC — $200,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetINNOVATIONS FOR POVERTY ACTION A NONPROFIT CORPORATION — $150,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetINTERNEWS NETWORK — $74,993 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEast Bay Agency for Children — $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMONTEREY BAY AQUARIUM FOUNDATION — $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPowerMyLearning Inc — $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetDream Catchers Inc — $15,000 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY CENTRAL ARIZONA — $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAUSTIN HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTACOMAPIERCE COUNTY HABITAT FOR HUMANIT — $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSOUTH SHORE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY PHILADELPHIA INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF WAKE COUNTY INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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 BRIGHT FUNDS FOUNDATION
  • Who funds BENEFICENT TECHNOLOGY INC
  • Who funds AMERICAN ONLINE GIVING FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds CITIZEN SCHOOLS INC
  • Who funds USHAHIDI INC
  • Who funds NETHOPE INC
  • Who funds INNOVATIONS FOR POVERTY ACTION A NONPROFIT CORPORATION
  • Who funds STUDENTS 2 SCIENCE INC
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE WORLD FOOD PROGRAM INC
  • Who funds INTERNEWS NETWORK
  • Who funds East Bay Agency for Children

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.

Habitat for Humanity International IncGA15.6× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Habitat for Humanity International Inc · Bright Funds Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Charity Bridge Fund · American Express Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · United Way Worldwide · Impactassetsinc · The US Charitable Gift Trust · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc

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 Cisco Systems 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 72 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $19M of grant expense with no grantee named in the published copy. A private foundation itemizes every grant it makes, so a return carrying none has filed its list as an attachment that the public copy does not include. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph