Skip to content
Digital Harbor Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Digital Harbor Foundation

Democratizing societal and economic well-being through digital equity for everyone, increased diversity in the tech sector, innovative education, and technology for the public good

$19M
Granted FY2024still arriving
32
Grants FY2024still arriving
13
States reached
$4.6M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01FY2024 · 32 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 32 grants below total $12,881,019, the rows itemized in this filing. The $18,688,138 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $5,807,119 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $6k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $152k
  • $50k–250k12 grants · $1.7M
  • $250k+13 grants · $11M
$200,000
Median grant
13
States reached
$57M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
RENAISSANCE PHILANTHROPY FUND$4,550,250
TATTA BIO$1,773,310
AMPLE CARBON PBC$1,342,400
US DIGITAL RESPONSE GRANTS MODERNIZATION$750,000
THE LEARNING AGENCY LLC$525,000
TALENT BEYOND BOUNDARIES$300,000
ASYLUM SEEKER ADVOCACY PROJECT$300,000
AMEELIO INC$250,000
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN$250,000
UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO$250,000
NEW AMERICA FOUNDATION$250,000
DATAKIND INC$250,000
ACUMEN AMERICA LLC$250,000
CENTER ON RURAL INNOVATION INC$200,000
CLINTON HEALTH ACCESS INITIATIVE$200,000
02The need
02

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 (FY24–24, $325k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 92% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%ASYLUM SEEKER ADVOCACY PROJECT: $300k → 17%THE ROOTS OF PROGRESS: $25k → 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

VT
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
PA
NJ
CA
VA
MD
DC
FL

Grants abroad, by region: $5.2M on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 5 regions, $3.9M to organizations and $1.3M to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$2.1M · 40% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: INCREASE THE RATE OF LEARNING FOR LOW-INCOME STUDENTS · PROGRAM SUPPORT

Sub-Saharan Africa$1.8M · 35% · 2 grants · 2 people

Stated purpose: IMPROVE MATH SCORES BY MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS · FELLOWSHIP TO USE AI · FELLOWSHIP - AI INNOVATIONS

Russia and Neighboring States$1.2M · 23% · 96 people

Stated purpose: SCHOLARSHIPS FOR UKRAINE STUDENTS · STIPENDS FOR UKRAINE STUDENTS

South America$75k · 1% · 1 person

Stated purpose: RESEARCH GRANT - HOLD MATH OLYMPIADS TO IDENTIFY STEM TALENT

North America (Canada and Mexico)$9k · 0% · 1 person

Stated purpose: FELLOWSHIP - AI INNOVATIONS

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. 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.
03Its 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
Partnership On Ai to Benefit People and Society

Bringing diverse voices together across global sectors, disciplines, and demographics so developments in ai advance positive outcomes for people and society.

Science & Tech
2
Finreglab Inc

Finreglab is a d.c.-based research organization working at the intersection of financial innovation and public policy. our mission is to advance technology and data use to help people and small businesses manage their financial lives,…

Science & Tech
3
Corporation for National Research Initiatives

Scientific research in information processing; fostering dev. of nat'l inf. infra.

Science & Tech
4
Development Gateway Inc

Development gateway (dg) creates tools and design processes that help collect, visualize, and use data for a more equitable world. for 20 years, we have built systems, dashboards, and tools to create more effective, open, and engaging…

International
5
IDENTITY2020 Systems Inc

Id2020 brings together diverse voices to set technical requirements, influence policy, and accelerate the implementation of digital id programs that benefit the most vulnerable.

—
6
Conservation X Labs Inc

To improve the efficacy, speed, cost, sustainability, and scaling of conservation solutions through harnessing exponential technology, innovation, and entrepreneurship to prevent human-induced extinction.

Animals
7
Npr International Operations Inc

Npr international operations, inc. supports national public radio, inc.'s international news-gathering activities through bureaus and offices established locally in foreign countries.

—
8
Middle East Investment Initiative Inc

Middle east investment initiative, inc. (meii) stimulates sustainable economic activity and long-lasting job creation in the middle east and north africa (mena) by designing and deploying finance and technical assistance programs to…

Community Improvement
9
The National Bureau of Asian Research

Nbr conducts advanced independent research on strategic, political, economic, energy, globalization, and health issues affecting u.s. relations with asia. drawing upon an extensive network of the world's leading specialists and leveraging…

—
10
International Budget Partnership

Ibp works with civil society, governments, international institutions and the private sector to bring about a world in which empowered citizens participate in open, inclusive public budgeting processes to shape policies and practices that…

International
11
Upturn Inc

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

—
12
The Israel Innovation Fund Inc

Our vision is to reignite the zionist spirit and meet the needs of jewish civilization in the twenty-first century by connecting people around the world through the vibrancy and creativity of contemporary israeli culture.

Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Global Development Incubator Inc; the most unlike its peers is Innovation Law Lab. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

21 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. 21 of the 32 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/21
Grantees still filing
7/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Renaissance Philanthropy Fund: $4,550,250 · Science & TechRenaissance Philanthropy FundTATTA BIO: $1,773,310 · Science & TechTATTA BIOAMPLE CARBON PBC: $1,342,400 · OtherAMPLE CARBON PBCThe Learning Agency: $525,000 · OtherThe Learning AgencyNEW AMERICA FOUNDATION: $250,000 · OtherNEW AMERICA FOUNDATIONAMEELIO INC: $250,000 · OtherAMEELIO INCACUMEN AMERICA LLC: $250,000 · OtherACUMEN AMERICA LLCREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $250,000 · OtherREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHI…PLYMOUTH STREET: $200,000 · OtherVEDIAN COLLEGE: $160,000 · OtherPATH IMMIGRATION INC: $150,000 · OtherDATAKIND INC: $250,000 · OtherDATAKIND INCInnovation Law Lab: $140,000 · Other+6 more: $161,081 · OtherUS DIGITAL RESPONSE: $750,000 · Public Safety & DisasterTALENT BEYOND BOUNDARIES INC: $300,000 · InternationalCLINTON HEALTH ACCESS INITIATIVE INC: $200,000 · InternationalCULTURAL VISTAS INC: $198,978 · InternationalTHE GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT INCUBATOR INC: $30,000 · InternationalCENTER ON RURAL INNOVATION INC: $200,000 · Community ImprovementNATIONAL CENTER FOR CIVIC INNOVATION IN: $200,000 · Community ImprovementGLOBAL DETROIT: $50,000 · Community ImprovementUniversity of Chicago: $250,000 · EducationPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $75,000 · EducationBENJAMIN FRANKLIN SOCIETY LIBRARY INC: $50,000 · EducationASYLUM SEEKER ADVOCACY PROJECT INC: $300,000 · Human ServicesTHE ROOTS OF PROGRESS: $25,000 · Human Services
Science & Tech$6,323,560Other$3,928,481Public Safety & Disaster$750,000International$728,978Community Improvement$450,000Education$375,000Human Services$325,000

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 budgetRenaissance Philanthropy Fund: $4,550,250 over 1y, 95% of budgetUS DIGITAL RESPONSE: $750,000 over 1y, 10% of budgetASYLUM SEEKER ADVOCACY PROJECT INC: $300,000 over 1y, 7.3% of budgetTALENT BEYOND BOUNDARIES INC: $300,000 over 1y, 16% of budgetNEW AMERICA FOUNDATION: $250,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetUniversity of Chicago: $250,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMEELIO INC: $250,000 over 1y, 30% of budgetDATAKIND INC: $250,000 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetCENTER ON RURAL INNOVATION INC: $200,000 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetNATIONAL CENTER FOR CIVIC INNOVATION IN: $200,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCLINTON HEALTH ACCESS INITIATIVE INC: $200,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCULTURAL VISTAS INC: $198,978 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetInnovation Law Lab: $140,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $75,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMIGRATION POLICY INSTITUTE: $58,013 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetGLOBAL DETROIT: $50,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetBENJAMIN FRANKLIN SOCIETY LIBRARY INC: $50,000 over 1y, 6.5% of budgetTHE GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT INCUBATOR INC: $30,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE ROOTS OF PROGRESS: $25,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR AMERICAN INNOVATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

Silicon Valley Commun…ImpactassetsincThe Rockefeller Found…Renaissance Philanthr…Fwdus Education Fund …The Ford FoundationRockefeller Philanthr…John S and James L Kn…Gates FoundationAmalgamated Charitabl…The Robert Wood Johns…Gs Donor Advised Phil…
Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA16.4× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Impactassetsinc · The Rockefeller Foundation · Renaissance Philanthropy Fund · Fwdus Education Fund Inc · The Ford Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · John S and James L Knight Foundation · Gates Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc

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 Digital Harbor Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Digital Harbor Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 37%
  • Center On Rural Innovation Inc: 37% of income from government
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College: 7% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
3report 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 32 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.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Digital Harbor’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