Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Computer and Communications Industry Association

To further the interests of companies in the computer and communications industries, including the interests of our members, by being the leading advocate promoting open, barrier-free competition in the offering of computer and communications products and services worldwide.

$248k
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$150k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20192024.

Employment$745kCommunity Improvement$584kEducation$560kPublic Benefit$350kScience & Tech$335kInternational$100kCivil Rights$10kArts & Culture$9k
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 2 grants below total $185,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $247,516 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $62,516 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–50k1 grant · $35k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $150k
$150,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$33M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION$150,000
COMMON CRAWL FOUNDATION$35,000
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 (FY19–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 79% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%BOSTON UNIVERSITY: $65k → 16%COMMON CRAWL FOUNDATION: $35k → 14%TEXAS 2036: $745k → 14%SHAKESPEARE THEATRE COMPANY: $9k → 14%INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR LAW & ECONOMICS: $100k → 12%GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $250k → 6%UNIFIED PATENTS: $100k → 14%GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $150k → 6%CENTER FOR THE NATIONAL INTEREST: $50k → 14%GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $150k → 6%NETCHOICE: $519k → 14%TECHFREEDOM: $200k → 14%CENTER FOR THE NATIONAL INTEREST: $200k → 14%TECHFREEDOM: $10k → 14%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.

Grants abroad, by region — $60k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$60k · 100% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: TO SUPPORT RECIPIENT'S RESEARCH TOWARD STRENGTHENING EU COMPETITIVENESS FOR DIGITAL PRODUCTS AND SERVICES. · TO SUPPORT RECIPIENT'S RESEARCH TOWARD SHARED LIABILITY REGIMES AND FINANCIAL FRAUD PROTECTION.

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

38%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.0M · 3 repeat orgs$1.7M to everyone else

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
8

Total granted

$1.0M
$1.6M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+16%
+27%

Still filing today

100%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 81% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $35k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’22’23’24
Public BenefitEducationScience & TechCommunity ImprovementInternationalArts & CultureOther

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

  • GM
    GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $550k · revenue -16%
  • CF
    CENTER FOR THE NATIONAL INTEREST
    2× · 2022–2023 · $250k · revenue +46%
  • T
    TECHFREEDOM
    2× · 2020–2023 · $210k · revenue +16%

Funded once

  • Texas 2036graduated
    one grant, 2022 · $745k · revenue +33%
  • N
    NetChoice
    one grant, 2022 · $519k · revenue -34%
  • UP
    UNIFIED PATENTS
    one grant, 2022 · $100k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your 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
Technology Policy Institute
International
2
Center for Democracy and Technology

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

Civil Rights
3
Open Markets Institute

The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.

Education
4
International Consortium of Investigative Journalists Inc

International consortium of investigative journalists, inc.'s (icij) mission is to show people how the world really works through stories that rock the world; forcing positive change.

International
5
Pew Research Center

Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan "fact tank" that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. Pew Research Center generates a foundation of facts that enriches the public dialogue and…

Social Science
6
Council On Foreign Relations Inc

The council on foreign relations (cfr) is an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher dedicated to being a resource for its members, government officials, business executives, journalists, educators and…

International
7
Competitive Enterprise Institute

Competitive enterprise institute (cei) is a non-profit public policy organization dedicated to the principles of free enterprise and limited government. we believe that consumers are best helped not by government regulation but by being…

8
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
9
Peter G Peterson Institute for International Economics

The peterson institute for international economics (piie) is an independent nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to strengthening prosperity and human welfare in the global economy through expert analysis and practical…

Social Science
10
Global Policy Forum Inc

Research and education of United Nations activities

International
11
Us - China Policy Foundation
12
Dc Policy Center

The mission of the d.c. policy center is to arm decision makers with fact-based, unbiased, and reliable research and analyses to help create a vibrant local economy that can maximize opportunities for residents, workers, and businesses in…

Public Benefit

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Techfreedom and the most unlike its peers is Commoncrawl 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

10 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. 10 of the 12 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Texas 2036 — $745,000 · Public BenefitTexas 2036CENTER FOR THE NATIONAL INTEREST — $250,000 · Public BenefitCENTER FOR THE NATIONAL INTERESTINTERNATIONAL POLICY NETWORK US INC — $100,000 · Public BenefitINTERNATIONAL POLICY NETWORK US INCGEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC — $550,000 · EducationGEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY…+1 more — $10,000 · EducationNetChoice — $518,750 · Community ImprovementNetChoiceTECHFREEDOM — $210,000 · Science & TechTECHFREEDO…Commoncrawl Foundation — $35,000 · Science & TechCommoncraw…UNIFIED PATENTS — $100,000 · OtherBOSTON UNIVERSITY — $65,000 · OtherCENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES — $100,000 · InternationalTHE SHAKESPEARE THEATRE — $8,778 · Arts & Culture
Public Benefit$1,095,000Education$560,000Community Improvement$518,750Science & Tech$245,000Other$165,000International$100,000Arts & Culture$8,778

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetTexas 2036 — $745,000 over 1y, 8.1% of budgetGEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC — $550,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetNetChoice — $518,750 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetCENTER FOR THE NATIONAL INTEREST — $250,000 over 2y, 11% of budgetTECHFREEDOM — $210,000 over 2y, 16% of budgetCENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES — $100,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetINTERNATIONAL POLICY NETWORK US INC — $100,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetCommoncrawl Foundation — $35,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetSAN DIEGO PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION — $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE SHAKESPEARE THEATRE — $8,778 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

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.

National Philanthropic TrustPA7.9× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Computer and Communications Industry Association 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%5%11%20%your share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%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 · 0–10%
    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Computer and Communications Industry Association?

    Find your warmest path to Computer and Communications Industry Association 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 12 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph