· 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
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 32 grants below total $12,881,019 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $18,688,138 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $5,807,119 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
- Under $10k1 grant · $6k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $152k
- $50k–250k12 grants · $1.7M
- $250k+13 grants · $11M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| 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 |
| ASYLUM SEEKER ADVOCACY PROJECT | $300,000 |
| TALENT BEYOND BOUNDARIES | $300,000 |
| ACUMEN AMERICA LLC | $250,000 |
| AMEELIO INC | $250,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN | $250,000 |
| NEW AMERICA FOUNDATION | $250,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO | $250,000 |
| DATAKIND INC | $250,000 |
| PLYMOUTH STREET | $200,000 |
| CLINTON HEALTH ACCESS INITIATIVE | $200,000 |
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.
Your 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 your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
Stated purpose: INCREASE THE RATE OF LEARNING FOR LOW-INCOME STUDENTS · PROGRAM SUPPORT
Stated purpose: IMPROVE MATH SCORES BY MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS · FELLOWSHIP TO USE AI · FELLOWSHIP - AI INNOVATIONS
Stated purpose: SCHOLARSHIPS FOR UKRAINE STUDENTS · STIPENDS FOR UKRAINE STUDENTS
Stated purpose: RESEARCH GRANT - HOLD MATH OLYMPIADS TO IDENTIFY STEM TALENT
Stated purpose: FELLOWSHIP - AI INNOVATIONS
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.
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.
A nonprofit scientific research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.
Bringing diverse voices together across global sectors, disciplines, and demographics so developments in ai advance positive outcomes for people and society.
Reduce global poverty and improve lives through innovative economic research that drives better policy and practice by the world's top decision makers. we focus on the intersection of developing countries and the governments, institutions…
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,…
Scientific research in information processing; fostering dev. of nat'l inf. infra.
Id2020 brings together diverse voices to set technical requirements, influence policy, and accelerate the implementation of digital id programs that benefit the most vulnerable.
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…
To improve the efficacy, speed, cost, sustainability, and scaling of conservation solutions through harnessing exponential technology, innovation, and entrepreneurship to prevent human-induced extinction.
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…
Upturn advances equity and justice in the design, governance, and use of technology.
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…
Our mission is to create a fair and inclusive economy where underserved people have quality financial choices and opportunities to improve their economic well-being. we find and help build innovative companies with the potential to reach…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Global Development Incubator Inc and 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.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 12 years old; the field is 16. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 14% of your grantees by number, and just 67% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
21 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 2017–2025, 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; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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 Renaissance Philanthropy Fund ↗
- Who funds TATTA BIO ↗
- Who funds US DIGITAL RESPONSE ↗
- Who funds TALENT BEYOND BOUNDARIES INC ↗
- Who funds ASYLUM SEEKER ADVOCACY PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds AMEELIO INC ↗
- Who funds DATAKIND INC ↗
- Who funds NEW AMERICA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds University of Chicago ↗
- Who funds CLINTON HEALTH ACCESS INITIATIVE INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL CENTER FOR CIVIC INNOVATION IN ↗
- Who funds CENTER ON RURAL INNOVATION INC ↗
- Who funds CULTURAL VISTAS INC ↗
- Who funds Innovation Law Lab ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗
- Who funds MIGRATION POLICY INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL DETROIT ↗
- Who funds BENJAMIN FRANKLIN SOCIETY LIBRARY INC ↗
- Who funds THE GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT INCUBATOR INC ↗
- Who funds THE ROOTS OF PROGRESS ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION FOR AMERICAN INNOVATION ↗
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.
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
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 Digital Harbor 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Center On Rural Innovation Inc — 37% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
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.