Skip to content
Interbranch Special Projects Foundation of Santa Clara County ISPF AAUW at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Interbranch Special Projects Foundation of Santa Clara County ISPF AAUW

ISPF was organized for charitable and educational purposes.

$323k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$16k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2025.

Education$66kArts & Culture$10kCivil Rights$10kHousing & Shelter$10kInternational$5k
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 5 grants below total $35,300, the rows itemized in this filing. The $322,892 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $287,592 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $20k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $16k
$5,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$745k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AAUW FUNDS$15,500
AAUW CA SPF$8,700
FAMILY SUPPORTIVE HOUSING$5,000
FRONT DOOR COMMUNITIES$5,000
TOWER FOUNDATION OF SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY$1,100
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 (FY25–25, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%FAMILY SUPPORTIVE HOUSING: $5k → 8%FRONT DOOR COMMUNITIES: $5k → 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.
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
04the grantee network

6 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. 6 of the 8 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/6
Grantees still filing
1/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

AAUW FUNDS: $40,800 · OtherAAUW FUNDSAAUW FUNDS: $20,000 · OtherAAUW FUNDSAmerican Association of University Women Special Projects Fund: $13,900 · EducationAmerican Association of Univ…AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY WOMEN INC: $10,000 · EducationAMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF UNIV…THE TOWER FOUNDATION OF SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY: $1,100 · EducationFAMILY SUPPORTIVE HOUSING INC: $5,000 · Human ServicesFAMILY SUPP…Front Door Communities: $5,000 · Human ServicesFront Door …Save The Children Federation Inc: $5,000 · International
Other$60,800Education$25,000Human Services$10,000International$5,000

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 budgetAmerican Association of University Women Special Projects Fund: $13,900 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetAMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY WOMEN INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFAMILY SUPPORTIVE HOUSING INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFront Door Communities: $5,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetSave The Children Federation Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE TOWER FOUNDATION OF SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY: $1,100 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.

Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO6.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Interbranch Special Projects Foundation of Santa Clara County ISPF AAUW funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Interbranch Special Projects Foundation of Santa Clara County ISPF AAUW. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 30%
  • Save the Children Federation Inc: 30% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
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.
04Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Interbranch Special Projects Foundation of Santa Clara County ISPF AAUW?

Find your warmest path to Interbranch Special Projects Foundation of Santa Clara County ISPF AAUW 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 8 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Interbranch Special Projects Foundation of Santa Clara County ISPF AAUW’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