Skip to content

· Private foundation

Ebay Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$11M
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$11M
Largest

Read this first · the figures below need context

100% of Ebay Foundation’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Silicon Valley Community Foundation, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.

Organizations named directly on the return

1
’17
1
’18
3
’19
2
’20
3
’21
4
’22
0
’23
0
’24

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Philanthropy$76MCommunity Improvement$890kInternational$417k
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$11,000,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$87M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SILICON VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$11,000,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 1% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%Silicon Valley Community Foundation: $21.8M → 8%Common Futures: $501k → 10%Northern California Grantmakers: $29k → 10%Small Business Majority Foundation Inc: $1k → 14%Right to Start: $250k → 5%Asset Funders Network: $15k → 14%Global Impact: $195k → 9%SILICON VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $12.0M → 8%Northern California Grantmakers: $4k → 10%Asset Funders Network: $5k → 14%Global Impact: $143k → 9%SILICON VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $11.0M → 8%Northern California Grantmakers: $4k → 10%Asset Funders Network: $4k → 14%Global Impact: $139k → 9%Silicon Valley Community Foundation: $14.5M → 8%NORTHERN CALIFORNIA GRANTMAKERS: $4k → 10%Asset Funders Network: $4k → 14%GLOBAL IMPACT: $79k → 9%Silicon Valley Community Foundation: $13.0M → 8%NORTHERN CALIFORNIA GRANTMAKERS: $4k → 10%SILICON VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $2.3M → 8%Silicon Valley Community Foundation: $1.0M → 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

IL
PA
CA
VA
MD
KS
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

12%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$124k · 4 repeat orgs$890k to everyone else

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2022, 3 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
1

Total granted

$124k
$139k

Still filing today

75%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 2% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $752k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22
Community ImprovementPhilanthropyOther
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

  • Northern California Grantmakers
    5× · 2017–2021 · $46k · revenue +157%
  • Council on Foundations Inc
    3× · 2019–2022 · $37k · revenue +1%
  • AF
    ASSET FUNDERS NETWORK
    3× · 2019–2021 · $27k · revenue +119%

Funded once

  • GI
    Global Impact
    one grant, 2019 · $139k
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
California Forward

Ca fwd drives action to identify solutions that can be taken to scale to meet the challenges the state is facing. the organization is driven by the belief that regional solutions across the state will help ensure economic, environmental,…

Public Benefit
2
SFMade Inc

Our mission is to help manufacturers thrive, innovate, and create good jobs, for a more diverse and sustainable Bay Area.

Community Improvement
3
Ucsf Foundation Investment Company

The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.

Education
4
Climate Foundation

To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.

Science & Tech
5
Minnesota Council on Foundations

MCF is a vibrant philanthropic community connecting, strengthening and mobilizing the power of philanthropy to advance prosperity and equity.

—
6
Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc

ACF is dedicated to supporting and increasing philanthropy by making grants to tax exempt organizations for their charitable, educational, scientific, literary or other 501c3 activities; promoting donor education and engagement, and civic…

Philanthropy
7
The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education
8
Global Forest Generation

Global Forest Generation restores and protects forest ecosystems in partnership with grassroots leaders and local communities across vast landscapes which play a critical role in preserving water, protecting biodiversity, storing carbon,…

Environment
9
Climate Access Fund Corporation

The Climate Access Fund develops and finances community solar products that serve low to moderate income households

Environment
10
Common Impact Inc

Common impact's mission is to strengthen the capacity of social change organizations, enabling them to better run and scale their programs. through its partnership with companies, common impact taps into the business skills and expertise…

Unclassified
11
Ffwd

FFWD accelerates the growth of technology nonprofits by providing financial and human capital to help scale technology solutions for education, environmental, health, and human rights issues.

Philanthropy
12
Coop Careers Inc

Building a movement of diverse, upwardly mobile college grads overcoming underemployment through digital skills and peer connections.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Asset Funders Network; the most unlike its peers is Right to Start. 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

8 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. 8 of the 10 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
7/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Silicon Valley Community Foundation: $75,649,936 · PhilanthropySilicon Valley Community Foundation+3 more: $109,000 · PhilanthropyCOMMON FUTURE: $500,500 · Community ImprovementRIGHT TO START: $250,000 · Community Improvement+1 more: $1,000 · Community ImprovementGlobal Impact: $417,415 · InternationalGlobal Impact: $138,667 · OtherCOUNCIL ON FOUNDATION INC: $14,600 · Other
Philanthropy$75,758,936Community Improvement$751,500International$417,415Other$153,267

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSilicon Valley Community Foundation: $75,649,936 over 7y, 0.8% of budgetCOMMON FUTURE: $500,500 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetGlobal Impact: $417,415 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetRIGHT TO START: $250,000 over 1y, 17% of budgetNorthern California Grantmakers: $45,500 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetCouncil on Foundations Inc: $36,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetASSET FUNDERS NETWORK: $27,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetSMALL BUSINESS MAJORITY FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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 Community FoundationCA14.5× affinity5 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The California Wellness Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 Ebay Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Ebay Foundation 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 10 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-PF 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 Ebay’s filings →

    More from the funding graph