Skip to content

· Public charity

San Jose Public Library Foundation

The san jos public library foundation supports educational programs and resources through the public library, schools, and community-based organizations, to create an educated, equitable, empowered and engaged community.

$2.6M
Granted FY2025still arriving
16
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$355k
Largest
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Education$13MHuman Services$407kCivil Rights$115kInternational$98kPhilanthropy$93kScience & Tech$88kOther$0
02FY2025 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 16 grants below total $2,474,663, the rows itemized in this filing. The $2,605,235 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $130,572 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

  • $50k–250k13 grants · $1.4M
  • $250k+3 grants · $1.0M
$140,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$7.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FRANKLIN-MCKINLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT$355,000
SAN JOSE PUBLIC LIBRARY$342,861
SAN JOSE PUBLIC LIBRARY$339,055
SAN JOSE PUBLIC LIBRARY$203,033
SANTA CLARA COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCAT$200,000
ALUM ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT$200,000
SAN JOSE PUBLIC LIBRARY$171,154
ALPHA PUBLIC SCHOOLS$140,000
CAMPBELL UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT$77,560
INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE$66,000
CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF SC COUNTY$66,000
SACRED HEART COMMUNITY SERVICE$66,000
SOURCEWISE$66,000
VIETNAMESE VOLUNTEER FOUNDATION$66,000
INTERNATIONAL CHILDREN ASST NETWORK$66,000
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 (FY23–25, $605k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 6%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 6%SOURCEWISE: $81k → 8%SOURCEWISE: $66k → 8%SOURCEWISE: $45k → 8%SACRED HEART COMMUNITY SERVICE: $89k → 8%SACRED HEART COMMUNITY SERVICE: $66k → 8%SACRED HEART COMMUNITY SERVICE: $63k → 8%CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF SC COUNTY: $83k → 8%CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF SC COUNTY: $66k → 8%CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF SC COUNTY: $46k → 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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$16M · 18 repeat orgs$795k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +13% since the first grant, against -3% for those funded once.

18 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
6

Total granted

$16M
$729k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+13%
-3%

Still filing today

28%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $66k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesEducationYouth DevelopmentInternationalCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • AP
    ALPHA PUBLIC SCHOOLS
    3× · 2022–2025 · $760k · revenue +32%
  • SACRED HEART COMMUNITY SERVICE
    3× · 2023–2025 · $218k · revenue +13%
  • S
    Sourcewise
    3× · 2023–2025 · $192k · revenue +27%

Funded once

  • RP
    READING PARTNERS
    one grant, 2024 · $225k · revenue -3%
  • ET
    ELEVATE TUTORING INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $188k · revenue +177% · 55% of their budget
  • MP
    MT PLEASANT SCHOOL DISTRICT
    one grant, 2018 · $100k
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
Achievekids

Achievekids schools provide individualized and multi-disciplinary programs that deliver special education, mental health, and family support services for students ages 5 to 22 who have complex and often severe developmental, emotional, and…

Education
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
Partners in College Success

Partners in College Success (PiCS) ensures equal access to higher education and an equitable college experience for low-income, refugee, immigrant, foster, homeless and disadvantaged youth in San Diego County. PiCS provides dedicated,…

Education
4
Healthy Cities Tutoring Inc

To provide students with the assistance they need to succeed in school and to facilitate the connecting of students and tutor/mentors for that purpose.

Education
5
The Campbell Institute

Children's institute's mission is to leverage research, practice, policy, and advocacy to shift systems toward justice for families so that all of oregon's children, prenatal to grade 5, have access to opportunity.

Unclassified
6
Sacramento Children's Home

At the sacramento children's home, we are committed to opening doors to the future by maximizing the potential of children and families.

Human Services
7
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
8
Allies for Every Child Inc

All children need a childhood. Allies for Every Child brings together and strengthens families, cultivating conditions for children to succeed in life. (Continues on Schedule O)

Human Services
9
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…

—
10
Latina Coalition of Silicon Valley

Our Mission is to develop and strengthen the power of Latinas to advance our collective success through sisterhood, leadership, and civic engagement.

Public Benefit
11
Literacy Design Collaborative Inc

Seeks to ensure that every student in america graduates from (continued on schedule o) high school with the literacy skills necessary for success in college and career. ldc is a teacher-created instructional design system that transforms…

Education
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Catholic Charities of Santa Clara County; the most unlike its peers is International Rescue Committee Inc. 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 25 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
4/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SAN JOSE PUBLIC LIBRARY: $5,466,234 · OtherSAN JOSE PUBLIC LIBRARYFranklin-McKinley School District: $2,305,484 · OtherFranklin-McKinley School DistrictALUM ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT: $2,158,603 · OtherALUM ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICTLUTHER BURBANK SCHOOL DISTRICT: $1,367,000 · OtherLUTHER BURBANK SCHOOL DISTRICTCAMPBELL UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT: $853,579 · OtherCAMPBELL UNION SCHOOL DISTRICTSANTA CLARA COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCAT: $665,252 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $542,219 · Other+10 more: $1,341,190 · Other+10 moreALPHA PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $760,000 · EducationREADING PARTNERS: $225,000 · EducationSACRED HEART COMMUNITY SERVICE: $218,100 · Human ServicesCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY: $194,950 · Human ServicesSourcewise: $191,900 · Human ServicesELEVATE TUTORING INC: $188,000 · Youth DevelopmentInternational Rescue Committee INC: $104,542 · InternationalSILICON VALLEY EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $22,750 · Community Improvement
Other$14,699,561Education$985,000Human Services$604,950Youth Development$188,000International$104,542Community Improvement$22,750

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 budgetALPHA PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $760,000 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetREADING PARTNERS: $225,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetSACRED HEART COMMUNITY SERVICE: $218,100 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY: $194,950 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetSourcewise: $191,900 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetELEVATE TUTORING INC: $188,000 over 1y, 55% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $104,542 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSILICON VALLEY EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $22,750 over 1y, 0.3% 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.

  • Who funds ALPHA PUBLIC SCHOOLS ↗
  • Who funds READING PARTNERS ↗
  • Who funds SACRED HEART COMMUNITY SERVICE ↗
  • Who funds CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds Sourcewise ↗
  • Who funds ELEVATE TUTORING INC ↗
  • Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
  • Who funds SILICON VALLEY EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗

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.

The Family Giving TreeCA15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Family Giving Tree · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Leo M Shortino Family Foundation · The Applied Materials Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 San Jose Public Library Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from San Jose Public Library Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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.

    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 25 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 San Jose Public Library’s filings →

    More from the funding graph