How much did THE SILICON VALLEY BANK FOUNDATION grant in FY2023?

Philanthropy$8.6MEducation$1.7MHuman Services$714kCommunity Improvement$713kCrime & Legal$627kFood & Nutrition$566kHealth$293kInternational$265kHousing & Shelter$263kOther$8.7M

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2018

non-profitprofessionalsyoung womensincecampchildren youngpet

2019

makingcoursestenderloinnapafarmworker housingrisk youthcourt

2020

writingcovidgetkidsstudentschange

2021

makehoustonhungryppp deieducation scholarhipequitynyc

2022

blacklatinoeducation singleeducation scholarshipyouth youthenableglobal

2023

—

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2023 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2023

$50k–250k2 grants · $288k
$250k+2 grants · $500k

$250,000

Median grant

States reached

$13M

Total assets

Largest grants

HOUSING TRUST OF SILICON VALLEY$250,000
GRAMEEN AMERICA INC$250,000
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM$200,000
UK ONLINE GIVING FOUNDATION$87,564

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–22, $638k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11% — the area typically sits at 10%. 57% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; 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, United Way ALICE — 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 6% of THE SILICON VALLEY BANK 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, 61% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 57% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

THE SILICON VALLEY BANK FOUNDATIONlessmore of its giving

Placed by recipient address · 2.5% directed abroad (not shown)

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.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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.

25%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$5.5M · 52 repeat orgs$17M to everyone else

52 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2023, 50 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

301

Total granted

$5.5M

$17M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+51%

+61%

Still filing today

63%

52%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 63% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $288k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Human ServicesEducationFood & NutritionHealthPhilanthropyHousing & ShelterOther

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

LF
LAW FOUNDATION OF SILICON VALLEY
3× · 2017–2022 · $538k · revenue +15%
GA
GRAMEEN AMERICA INC
2× · 2022–2023 · $500k · revenue +598%
MO
MEALS ON WHEELS OF SAN FRANCISCO INC
2× · 2018–2021 · $255k · revenue +16%

Funded once

SILICON VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATIONgraduated
one grant, 2017 · $8.2M · revenue +102%
AS
ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY
one grant, 2021 · $500k · revenue -3% · 30% of their budget
AF
ASU FOUNDATION
one grant, 2022 · $500k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

Feeding San Diego

On a mission to connect every person facing hunger with nutritious meals... feeding san diego is on a mission to connect every person facing hunger with nutritious meals by maximizing food rescue. through direct service and community…

Food & Nutrition

United Food Bank

Uniting communities to alleviate hunger.

Food & Nutrition

The Nasdaq Entrepreneurial Center Inc

Deliver world-class resources and mentoring to enable every entrepreneur across the globe to realize their maximum potential.

Arts & Culture

Women's Foundation of California

Women's foundation of california amplifies the voices and experiences of community leaders, redistributes knowledge, power, and resources, and mobilizes communities and funders to advance justice for all.

—

California Forward

California forward (ca fwd) brings people together across regions to improve government and create resilient growth statewide.

Public Benefit

Unitedly

Unitedly is a nonprofit organization based in San Mateo County, California. Unitedly was established to ensure Asian families and communities have access to equitable opportunities and resources to thrive in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Human Services

Kqed Inc

Inform, inspire, involve

Arts & Culture

Techsoup Global

Techsoup global is a recognized leader in bringing technological empowerment and philanthropy to social benefit organizations - including non-profits, nongovernmental organizations, libraries and other social change agents.

—

Silicon Schools Fund Inc

Support the launch of excellent new schools and innovative practices that improve education.

Education

Hispanic Foundation of Silicon Valley

Investing in the health, education & leadership of the hispanic community in silicon valley.

Community Improvement

Svhome

Driving the creation of affordable housing for a more vibrant and equitable silicon valley.

Housing & Shelter

Los Angeles Regional Food Bank

The organization's mission is to mobilize resources to fight hunger in our community. to fulfill its mission, the food bank:* sources and acquires nutritious food and other products and distribute them to people experiencing nutrition…

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sacred Heart Community Service and the most unlike its peers is Our Town St Helena. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 34 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) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/204

the rest of the field

12%

22,290/186,774

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.

06the grantee network

196 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

190/196

Grantees still filing

151/196

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Philanthropy$8,626,936Other$9,487,168Education$1,723,325Human Services$714,200Community Improvement$712,500Crime & Legal$627,000Food & Nutrition$565,500

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.

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.

Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA39.8× affinity64 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The Sobrato Family Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Mufg Union Bank Foundation Ag · The San Francisco Foundation · The Yelp Foundation · Synchrony Foundation · Arizona Community Foundation · Bright Funds Foundation · Tides Foundation · Thunderbirds Charities · The Applied Materials 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 organisation THE SILICON VALLEY BANK 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

7get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

high risk

~2 months of operating runway; revenue held over 6 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

6 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 866053009 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

FlagFinancial stability— Roughly 2 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2023; revenue held over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 30% of their budget — diversified.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to The Silicon Valley Bank Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Silicon Valley Bank Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

THE SILICON VALLEY BANK FOUNDATION

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

196 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The Silicon Valley Bank Foundation?

More from the funding graph

THE SILICON VALLEY BANK FOUNDATION

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

196 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The Silicon Valley Bank Foundation?

More from the funding graph