· Private foundation
Sand Hill Angels Charitable Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2023.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Mission Bit | $5,000 |
| Digital Nest | $5,000 |
| Future of Reading | $4,500 |
| Venture Free Foundaton | $3,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,900 |
| INSIGHTS Science Discovery | $2,350 |
| Latino Outdoors | $2,200 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,100 |
| Post Carbon Institute | $1,900 |
| Propel | $1,200 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY22–22, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 13% of Sand Hill Angels Charitable Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 87% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 73% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
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.
Bay Nature connects the people of the San Francisco Bay Area to our natural world and motivates people to solve problems with nature in mind. Our vision is that all people have a close relationship with theirnatural world.
The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.
Fossil Free California works to end financial support for climate-damaging fossil fuels and promotes the transition to a socially just and environmentally sustainable society.
Hack the Hood provides youth and communities of color with tech skill-building programs and career navigation support that are grounded in justice and ensure economic mobility.
Nuestra Casa exists to uplift Latino families in East Palo Alto and the mid-peninsula through community education, leadership and advocacy
Our mission is to help manufacturers thrive, innovate, and create good jobs, for a more diverse and sustainable Bay Area.
Lab rental spaces
Project Include's mission is to give everyone a fair chance to succeed in tech. We are a non-profit that uses data and advocacy to accelerate diversity and inclusion solutions in the tech industry.
The Colorwave Project, Inc. dba Colorwave is organized and operated for educational purposes for underrepresented professionals in the startup and high-growth business sector. Our organization leads an eight-week leadership program to help…
Pasadena bio collaborative incubator is a nonprofit organization focused on economic development and job creation in southern california. we encourage the growth of an innovative biotechnology industry by providing educational/training…
Our mission is to protect local nature and farmland to ensure a healthy environment for everyone.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Digital Nest Inc and the most unlike its peers is Harmonious Home Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 21 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
22 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 22 of the 28 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds FUTURE OF READING ↗
- Who funds FIRST GRADUATE ↗
- Who funds STTE Foundation ↗
- Who funds MAITRI ↗
- Who funds WEHOPE ↗
- Who funds DIGITAL NEST INC ↗
- Who funds Mission Bit ↗
- Who funds Kits Cubed Inc ↗
- Who funds Culinary Angels ↗
- Who funds HARMONIOUS HOME INC ↗
- Who funds Environmental Volunteers Inc ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION FOR EXCELLENCE INC ↗
- Who funds PABLOVE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds VENTURE FREE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds TIDES CENTER ↗
- Who funds Canopy ↗
- Who funds LOAVES & FISHES FAMILY KITCHEN ↗
- Who funds Insights-El Paso Science Center Inc ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY INITIATIVES ↗
- Who funds Nine Lives Foundation ↗
- Who funds METAFOUNDATION DBA POST CARBON INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Propl ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Tides Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Atkinson Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · The Palo Alto Community Fund · Los Altos Mountain View Community Foundation · The Sobrato Family Foundation · Philanthropic Ventures Foundation · Gordon E and Betty I Moore Foundation · Bright Funds Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Sand Hill Angels Charitable Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Sand Hill Angels Charitable Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Sand Hill Angels Charitable 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.