· Public charity
The Dirk and Charlene Kabcenell Foundation
The specific purpose of this corporation is to support the silicon valley community foundation by engaging in the same charitable purposes as the silicon valley community foundation.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2022.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2022
- $10k–50k21 grants · $430k
- $50k–250k20 grants · $2.3M
- $250k+3 grants · $1.8M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Silicon Valley Community Foundation | $1,125,591 |
| Massachusetts Institute of Technology | $450,000 |
| Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University | $251,000 |
| Children Now | $205,000 |
| EdSource Inc | $175,000 |
| Public Policy Institute of California | $150,000 |
| Hawaii Community Foundation | $135,000 |
| Sustainable Conservation | $125,000 |
| Resources Legacy Fund | $125,000 |
| American Institutes for Research in the Behavioral Sciences | $125,000 |
| The Nature Conservancy of California | $111,000 |
| Natural Resources Defense Council Inc | $110,000 |
| Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated | $110,000 |
| Ocean Conservancy Inc | $100,000 |
| Conservation International Foundation | $100,000 |
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 (FY17–22, $733k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 97% 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.
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.
43 repeat relationships — 37 still active in FY2022, 6 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (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 FY2022, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $170k 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
- TSTHEATREWORKS SILICON VALLEY6× · 2017–2022 · $1.3M · revenue +56%
PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA6× · 2017–2022 · $840k · revenue +6%
MONTEREY BAY AQUARIUM FOUNDATION6× · 2017–2022 · $730k · revenue +105%
Funded once
- WWESTEDone grant, 2019 · $175k
- UOUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA BARBARA FOUNDATIONone grant, 2017 · $110k
- SMSan Mateo County Office of Educationone grant, 2020 · $75k
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 union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
Create and publish educational materials, conduct professional development, promote awareness, and sponsor research on the spectacular biological diversity of the State of CA.
California ocean science trust (ost) is a non-profit organization dedicated to accelerating progress towards a healthy and productive ocean future for california. created by state legislation, ost bridges the gap between cutting-edge…
The Chile-California Council is a San Francisco-based nonprofit dedicated to developing and promoting joint endeavors and cooperative relations between Chile and California, as well as individuals, legal entities and other institutions in…
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
The aquarium of the pacific's mission is to instill a sense of wonder, respect, and stewardship for the pacific ocean, its inhabitants, and ecosystems.
The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.
The association serves its members by creating resources that enable california school administrators to develop and apply creative leadership and management skills and in turn, improve the educational process for all students.
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
The institute is dedicated to scientific research, the results of which are used to promote public awareness and education in the areas of conservation biology and ecology,including the wise use of natural resources.
The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.
Ca fwd drives action to identify solutions that can be taken to scale to meet the challenges the state is facing. the organization is driven by the belief that regional solutions across the state will help ensure economic, environmental,…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Science Friday Initiative Inc and the most unlike its peers is Computer History Museum. 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 32 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% 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.
58 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. 58 of the 65 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 Silicon Valley Community Foundation ↗
- Who funds Massachusetts Institute of Technology ↗
- Who funds THEATREWORKS SILICON VALLEY ↗
- Who funds THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds KQED INC ↗
- Who funds PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds MONTEREY BAY AQUARIUM FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PENINSULA OPEN SPACE TRUST ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN NOW ↗
- Who funds EDSOURCE INC ↗
- Who funds RESOURCES LEGACY FUND ↗
- Who funds MILLS COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds The Pew Charitable Trusts ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH IN THE BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds PIVOT LEARNING ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds OCEAN CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds Sustainable Conservation ↗
- Who funds THE TECH INTERACTIVE ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds UC SANTA BARBARA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds OREGON SHAKESPEARE FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE EXPLORATORIUM ↗
- Who funds PARTNERSHIP FOR LOS ANGELES SCHOOLS ↗
- Who funds Full Circle Fund ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds PARTNERS IN SCHOOL INNOVATION ↗
- Who funds PIE RANCH ↗
- Who funds HAWAII COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Marine Science Institute ↗
- Who funds THE CORAL REEF ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY INITIATIVES ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL EQUITY PROJECT ↗
- Who funds HUMANE SOCIETY SILICON VALLEY ↗
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 · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Gordon E and Betty I Moore Foundation · Elbridge Stuart Foundation Dba Stuart Foundation · Esb Charitable Foundation · The California Endowment · The San Francisco Foundation · Gates Foundation · California Community Foundation · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · Evelyn and Walter Haas Jr Fund
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 The Dirk and Charlene Kabcenell 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.
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology — 35% of income from government
- Oregon Shakespeare Festival Association Inc — 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.