· Public charity
Scratch Foundation
See Schedule OThe Scratch Foundation (the Foundation) is a nonprofit organization that develops and supports the Scratch creative coding website and online community.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 21 grants below total $555,500 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $939,000 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $383,500 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k4 grants · $28k
- $10k–50k15 grants · $262k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $266k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Trustees of Boston College (Devtech Research Group) | $210,000 |
| Harvard University | $56,000 |
| STEAM For Vietnam Foundation | $40,000 |
| People For Public Leadership | $30,000 |
| Hampton University | $30,000 |
| The Clubhouse Network | $25,000 |
| STEM NOLA | $20,000 |
| Mississippi State University | $15,000 |
| Somerset Community Action Program | $15,000 |
| Televisa Foundation Inc | $15,000 |
| Ausometech Industries LLC | $11,500 |
| NEFL Regional STEM2 Hub Inc | $10,000 |
| Mirror of Hope Foundation DBA Inspireher STEM | $10,000 |
| PS 94 The Kings College School | $10,000 |
| University System of Maryland | $10,000 |
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 (FY23–24, $45k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 33% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
Which US states your grants reach
Grants abroad, by region — $354k on the FY2024 return
Schedule F, as filed: 6 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: Development and facilitation of free coding workshops for kids, localization of materials to increase cultural relevance, and to scale your engagement with educators.
Stated purpose: Development and facilitation of free coding workshops for kids, localization of materials to increase cultural relevance, and to scale your engagement with educators.
Stated purpose: Development and facilitation of free coding workshops for kids, localization of materials to increase cultural relevance, and to scale your engagement with educators.
Stated purpose: Development and facilitation of free coding workshops for kids, localization of materials to increase cultural relevance, and to scale your engagement with educators.
Stated purpose: Development and facilitation of free coding workshops for kids, localization of materials to increase cultural relevance, and to scale your engagement with educators.
Stated purpose: Development and facilitation of free coding workshops for kids, localization of materials to increase cultural relevance, and to scale your engagement with educators.
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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +29% since the first grant, against +10% for the ones you funded once.
10 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 11 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 68% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $158k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
TRUSTEES OF BOSTON COLLEGE3× · 2022–2024 · $550k · revenue +12%
Trustees of Tufts College3× · 2017–2019 · $280k · revenue +50%- CFCENTER FOR THE INNOVATIVE TRAINING OF YOUTH INC3× · 2022–2024 · $95k · revenue +29%
Funded once
- DCDev Colorgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $35k · revenue +58%
- MKMOCO KIDSCO INCgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $20k · revenue +351%
- ROREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT SAN DIEGOone grant, 2023 · $15k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
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…
The mission of the charter school is to prepare students for higher learning in a safe, caring, and collaborative atmosphere through a quality learner-centered educational program with a strong emphasis on science, technology, engineering,…
Project exploration creates transformative learning opportunities for youth underrepresented in the sciences -- particularly students of color and girls -- by equipping them with the skills, practices, and mindset needed for a lifelong…
To provide leadership and support for the national effort to increase the representation of successful african american, native american and latinx women and men in engineering and technology, math, and science-based careers.
Our mission is to challenge and nurture young women to thrive in future global markets through personalized STEM advanced academics. Through a supportive small school and single-gender environment, project-based learning, and STEM advanced…
By partnering anthropology with science and technology, we invite the world to design, construct and engage in experiences that link learning to life. past works with schools, districts and states to help transform education in terms of…
The concord consortium innovates and inspires equitable, large-scale improvements in stem teaching and learning through technology...(continued on schedule o)
Dfsme's mission is to strengthen science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education to prepare all delaware students to be informed citizens and competitive in the global workforce.
Through a combination of stem enrichment, digital inclusion, and summer learning programs, the stem alliance advances equal opportunity in education. our evidence-based model has 5 differentiating factors.high quality: our hands-on,…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Girls Who Code Inc and the most unlike its peers is Maker Prep a Nj Nonprofit Corporation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 13 years old; the field is 17. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% lost their exemption, against 11% 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.
37 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. 37 of the 57 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 Massachusetts Institute of Technology ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF BOSTON COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds Trustees of Tufts College ↗
- Who funds THE CLUBHOUSE NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR THE INNOVATIVE TRAINING OF YOUTH INC ↗
- Who funds STEAM FOR VIETNAM FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Dev Color ↗
- Who funds HAMPTON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds PEOPLE FOR PUBLIC LEADERSHIP INC ↗
- Who funds Bridges to Science ↗
- Who funds MOCO KIDSCO INC ↗
- Who funds CODECREW ↗
- Who funds NEW YORK HALL OF SCIENCE ↗
- Who funds SOMERSET COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM INC ↗
- Who funds HIDDEN GENIUS PROJECT ↗
- Who funds EAST FORT WORTH MONTESSORI SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds BOOLEAN GIRL INC ↗
- Who funds MAKER PREP A NJ NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds CODEVA INC ↗
- Who funds NEXTECHORG INC ↗
- Who funds GIRLS WHO CODE INC ↗
- Who funds BRSTEM INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds AVID CENTER ↗
- Who funds MUSEUM OF SCIENCE ↗
- Who funds Cornell University ↗
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: Infosys Foundation USA · Codeorg · GenYOUTH Incorporated · For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology (FIRST) · Tides Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America · Network for Good · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc
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 Scratch 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology — 35% of income from government
- Televisa Foundation Inc — 18% of income from government
- Moco Kidsco Inc — 15% of income from government
- Trustees of Tufts College — 13% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston College — 3% of income from government
- The Clubhouse Network Inc — 1% of income from government
- Museum of Science — 0% of income from government
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.