Skip to content
Hewlett Packard Enterprise Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Hewlett Packard Enterprise Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$7.1M
Granted FY2021
10
Grants FY2021
5
States reached
$4.2M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

68% of Hewlett Packard Enterprise Foundation’s FY2025 grant dollars went to American Online Giving Foundation Inc, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 8 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2021, the last year Hewlett Packard Enterprise Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 5 organizations, $7M. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

3
’18
3
’19
4
’20
5
’21
8
’22
5
’23
3
’24
8
’25

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

01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

Philanthropy$30MEmployment$17MScience & Tech$3.5MPublic Safety & Disaster$1.5MCivil Rights$1.2MEnvironment$500kInternational$483kHuman Services$433kOther$0
02FY2021 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2021

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $70k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $300k
  • $250k+5 grants · $6.7M
$250,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$103M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AMERICA ONLINE GIVING FOUNDATION$4,220,000
FFWD HPE Foundation$1,269,925
SILICON VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$740,000
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL$250,000
AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS$250,000
UNITED WAY OF GREATER HOUSTON$200,000
UNITED STATES FOR UNICEF$100,000
UK CHARITABLE GIVING FOUNDATION$35,000
AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION$25,000
ONE MIND INSTITUTE$10,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY18–25, $2.0M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 53% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 11%YWCA SILICON VALLEY: $167k → 8%AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS: $250k → 10%BOYS HOPE GIRLS HOPE: $34k → 21%YWCA GOLDEN GATE SILICON VALLEY: $167k → 8%AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS: $250k → 10%AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS: $250k → 14%YWCA GOLDEN GATE SILICON VALLEY: $100k → 8%AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS: $250k → 14%AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS: $250k → 14%AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS: $250k → 14%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

NY
MA
CA
MO
VA
DC
TX
FL
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.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$24M · 11 repeat orgs$5.6M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +46% since the first grant, against -54% for those funded once.

11 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2021, 7 since wound down; 20 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call). Read against FY2021, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
3

Total granted

$24M
$140k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+46%
-54%

Still filing today

73%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $551k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationHuman ServicesHealthEnvironmentPhilanthropyCivil RightsOther
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

  • F
    FFWD
    2× · 2019–2020 · $2.4M · revenue +518% · 32% of their budget
  • AN
    American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches
    6× · 2018–2023 · $1.5M · revenue +9%
  • YG
    YWCA GOLDEN GATE SILICON VALLEY
    2× · 2018–2020 · $433k · revenue +255%

Funded once

  • NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUC FUND INC
    one grant, 2020 · $100k · revenue -54%
  • WASHINGTON UNIVERSITYgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $25k · revenue +76%
  • ZF
    ZOE FOUNDATION FOR INFUSION ART THERAPY
    one grant, 2019 · $15k · revenue -84%
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
Medtech Innovator

Medtech innovator organizes and runs a global competition and virtual accelerator for medical device, digital health, and diagnostic startup companies.

Education
2
Endeavor Global Inc (F/K/a the Endeavor Initiative Inc)

Endeavor is leading the high-impact entrepreneurship movement around the world.

International
3
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
4
National Science and Technology Medals Foundation Inc

The nstmf's mission is to build inclusive stem communities across the united states. fundamental to these communities are the significant, inspirational connections we foster between the individuals who have received national recognition…

—
5
AI4ALL

Ai4all's mission is to ensure that the next generation of ai leaders reflects humanity. ai4all is transforming the pipeline of ai practitioners who will shape ai for the benefit of humanity.

Youth Development
6
The Poptech Institute

Poptech's mission is to accelerate the positive impact of world-changing people, projects and ideas. founded in 1996 by bob metcalfe (inventor, ethernet) and john sculley (apple, pepsi), poptech originally provided a forum to critically…

Education
7
Third Way

To research and develop centrist policy ideas.

Civil Rights
8
World Learning Inc

Creating a more sustainable, peaceful, and just world through education, development, and exchange since 1932. as both an accredited academic institution and an international ngo, world learning, inc. offers the best of theory and practice…

International
9
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education
10
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
11
Third Way Institute

Third way institute supports charitable and educational activities that advance centrist solutions to major economic, national security, energy and social policy issues.

Civil Rights
12
Activate Global Inc

Activate empowers scientists to reinvent the world by bringing their research to market. activate partners with u.s. based funders, research institutions, and other pillars of the hard technology community to help entrepreneurial…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Vilcap Inc; the most unlike its peers is Zoe Foundation for Infusion Art Therapy. 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

28 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 28 of the 37 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
28/28
Grantees still filing
17/28
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

AMERICAN ONLINE GIVING FOUNDATION INC: $16,668,000 · PhilanthropyAMERICAN ONLINE GIVING FOUNDATION INCSilicon Valley Community Foundation: $10,289,500 · PhilanthropySilicon Valley Community FoundationFFWD: $2,393,910 · PhilanthropyFFWD+1 more: $200,000 · PhilanthropyAMERICA ONLINE GIVING FOUNDATION: $13,758,500 · OtherAMERICA ONLINE GIVING FOUNDATIONIndividual grant recipient: $4,634,845 · OtherIndividual grant recipientHPE FOUNDATION: $1,683,810 · OtherHPE FOUNDATIONFFWD HPE Foundation: $1,269,925 · OtherFFWD HPE FoundationMASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (MIT SOLVE): $1,030,000 · Other+15 more: $910,000 · OtherAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $1,500,000 · Human ServicesYWCA GOLDEN GATE SILICON VALLEY: $433,333 · Human Services+1 more: $33,500 · Human ServicesNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $500,000 · EnvironmentLABSTART INNOVATIONS INC: $425,000 · EnvironmentInternational Rescue Committee INC: $382,500 · InternationalHALCYON HOUSE: $335,602 · Arts & CultureASIA SOCIETY TEXAS CENTER: $25,000 · Arts & CultureCAREERVILLAGE INC: $113,213 · EducationTeach for America Inc: $100,000 · EducationGood Reason Houston Inc: $100,000 · EducationWASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $25,000 · Education+1 more: $10,000 · Education
Philanthropy$29,551,410Other$23,287,080Human Services$1,966,833Environment$925,000International$382,500Arts & Culture$360,602Education$348,213

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 budgetAMERICAN ONLINE GIVING FOUNDATION INC: $16,668,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetSilicon Valley Community Foundation: $10,289,500 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetFFWD: $2,393,910 over 2y, 32% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $1,500,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $500,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetYWCA GOLDEN GATE SILICON VALLEY: $433,333 over 2y, 2.3% of budgetLABSTART INNOVATIONS INC: $425,000 over 3y, 12% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $382,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHALCYON HOUSE: $335,602 over 2y, 2.7% of budgetVILCAP INC: $235,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetUnited Way of Greater Houston: $200,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCAREERVILLAGE INC: $113,213 over 3y, 5.0% of budgetNAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUC FUND INC: $100,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTeach for America Inc: $100,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGood Reason Houston Inc: $100,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $50,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHOPE IGNITES: $33,500 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetDEVELOP FOR GOOD: $25,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetNATIONAL ACTION COUNCIL FOR MINORITIES IN ENGINEERING INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetASIA SOCIETY TEXAS CENTER: $25,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetJUST CAPITAL FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCentro Community Partners: $20,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetZOE FOUNDATION FOR INFUSION ART THERAPY: $15,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetONE MIND: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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…Tides FoundationImpactassetsincNational Philanthropi…Gates FoundationTruist Foundation IncThe Goldman Sachs Cha…Greater Houston Commu…The Blackbaud Giving …Gs Donor Advised Phil…Morgan Stanley Global…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…
Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA18.9× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Tides Foundation · Impactassetsinc · National Philanthropic Trust · Gates Foundation · Truist Foundation Inc · The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · Greater Houston Community Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    10report 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Hewlett Packard Enterprise Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Hewlett Packard Enterprise 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 37 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 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Hewlett Packard Enterprise’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