Skip to content

· Public charity

Human-I-T

Create equitable access to opportunity by providing devices, internet access, digital skills training, and tech support for communities left on the wrong side of the digital divide.

$3.8M
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it funds
0150% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2023 to 2024.

Housing & Shelter$50kOther$0
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $50,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $3,814,008 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $3,764,008 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.
$50,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$17M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Detroit Housing Commission$50,000
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 (FY24–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 21%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Detroit Housing Commission: $50k → 21%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.
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 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
Boys and Girls Clubs of Silicon Valley

To inspire and empower all young people, especially those who need us most, to realize their full potential as productive, responsible and caring adults.

Youth Development
2
Enterprise for Youth

Enterprise for youth empowers under-resourced san francisco youths to reach their potential through transformative paid internship experiences supported by a community of employers, caring adults, and peers.

Youth Development
3
Stem Advantage

Talent is equally distributed, but opportunity is not. STEM Advantage mentors, prepares, and inspires first-generation, low-income, and underserved college students for careers in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM). We level…

Youth Development
4
Community Development Technologies Center

To build livable and economically viable communities in the low income areas of This is accomplished by Greater Los Angeles strengthening the skils and self-sufficiency of residents, businesses of residents, businesses and community…

Community Improvement
5
Cincinnati Youth Collaborative

Cincinnati Youth Collaborative ("CYC") empowers young people to overcome barriers and excel in education, career, and life.

Education
6
Boys and Girls Clubs of the Twin Cities

To enable young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring, responsible citizens. for more information visit www.boysandgirls.org.

Youth Development
7
California School-Age Consortium Inc

The California School-Age Consortium (CalSAC) builds professional networks that provide training, leadership development and advocacy to ensure that all young people have access to high quality out-of-school time programs and to create a…

—
8
Legacy La Youth Development Corp

To make positive interventions in the lives of young people by offering alternatives to gangs and violence. legacy la builds the capacity of youth to reach their full potential and equips them with tools to transform their lives and…

Crime & Legal
9
San Antonio Education Fund Dba San Antonio Education Partnership

The partnership empowers students with quality educational programs, resources and counseling that will make them confident, knowledgeable and help them finish college and contribute to san antonio's future, making the students san…

Education
10
Berkeley Community Scholars Dba Berkeley Community Fund

Berkeley Community Scholars empowers Berkeley youth who face racial, economic, and other barriers to achieving their college dreams by providing a unique experience of scholarships, advising, mentoring, and a community of support.

Philanthropy
11
Stl Youth Jobs

Our mission is to bridge the divide between our regions youth and the growing skills gap in our workforce. we envision a city where our youth have the opportunity they need to succeed, and our businesses have the workforce they need to…

Youth Development
12
Asian Resources Inc

Employment and training services

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Literacy Coalition of Central Texas; the most unlike its peers is Iamangel 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

257 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2024–2024.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2024 to 2024, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
32
Early backer (in before they grew)
255/257
Grantees still filing
121/257
Grew since first funded

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

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their 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.

AT&T FoundationTX45.6× affinity31 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: AT&T Foundation · Boys & Girls Clubs of America · Boys & Girls Clubs of America (Group Return) · Comerica Charitable Foundation · United Way for Southeastern Michigan · Mufg Union Bank Foundation Ag · Bothin Foundation · Wells Fargo Foundation · The Annenberg Foundation · Ross Stores Foundation · The Ralph M Parsons Foundation · Charles Schwab 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.
04Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Human-I-T?

Find your warmest path to Human-I-T 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 1 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 Human-I-T’s filings →

More from the funding graph