How much did THE WIRELESS FOUNDATION grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 45% of THE WIRELESS FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

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

2020

—

2021

—

2022

emotionalcurajoy

2023

emotionalcurajoyincrease

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

03FY2024 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

$10k–50k8 grants · $165k
$50k–250k2 grants · $175k

$25,000

Median grant

States reached

$36M

Total assets

Largest grants

UPCHIEVE$111,800
HEALTHY HIP HOP FOUNDATION$62,800
BEFOREWEBEGIN INC$38,400
CAMELBACK VENTURES$25,000
FAST FORWARD$25,000
PATIENTORY INC$16,000
PALMPLUG$16,000
KAI XR FUTURES INC$15,000
STORYUP INC$15,000
OBJECTIVE ZERO FOUNDATION$15,000

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 (FY21–23, $119k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14% — the area typically sits at 9%. 100% 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.

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.

62%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$1.1M · 12 repeat orgs$687k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +347% since the first grant, against +154% for the ones you funded once.

12 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$1.1M

$427k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+347%

+154%

Still filing today

50%

20%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 24% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $260k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EducationHealthPhilanthropyCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesArts & CultureOther

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

FF
FAST FORWARD
5× · 2020–2024 · $225k · revenue +1095%
CV
CAMELBACK VENTURES
5× · 2020–2024 · $200k · revenue +139%
OZ
OBJECTIVE ZERO FOUNDATION
5× · 2020–2024 · $189k · revenue +347%

Funded once

RI
RETHINK INC
one grant, 2023 · $118k
DN
DOPE NERDS
one grant, 2023 · $73k
B
BLOOMLIFE
one grant, 2021 · $55k

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.

Upturn Inc

Upturn advances equity and justice in the design, governance, and use of technology.

—

Upaya Social Ventures

Upaya Social Ventures fights extreme poverty through dignified jobs. Founded in 2011, Upaya provides investment and consulting support to early-stage businesses aimed at creating jobs for people living in extreme poverty.

International

Techbridge Girls

Techbridge Girls re-engineers the way BIPOC girls* from marginalized communities experience STEM by catalyzing out-of- school time STEM educators and STEM professionals into equity educators and advo- cates through training and curricula…

Education

IDENTITY2020 Systems Inc

Ensuring digital id is responsibly implemented and widely accessible.

—

Merit Network Inc

Merit Network's mission is to be a respected leader in developing and providing advanced networking services to the research and education community. Merit is a trusted source for providing high-quality network infrastructure; initiating…

Public Benefit

Ucsf Foundation Investment Company

the organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the UCSF Foundation.

Education

Fudan University Education Development Foundation

FUDAN UNIVERSITY EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION is organized exclusively for charitable and educational purposes with the mission as promoting higher education and academic research of Fudan University. FUDAN UNIVERSITY EDUCATION…

Education

OneJustice

Strengthen the legal services sector's expertise and capacity to advance justice and equity.

—

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.

—

Deans for Impact

Deans for Impact supports educator-preparation programs to bring the science of learning into teaching practice; partners with policymakers to ensure pathways into teaching are accessible, practice-based, and instructionally-focused; and…

Education

UniversalGiving

Our mission is to connect people to quality giving and volunteer opportunities worldwide. universalgiving is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization, whose vision is to create a world where giving and volunteering are a natural part of everyday…

Philanthropy

California Forward

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

Public Benefit

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ffwd and the most unlike its peers is Okayso. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

05the grantee network

11 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2024.

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)

11/11

Grantees still filing

8/11

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$821,700Education$226,100Philanthropy$225,000Health$204,550Community Improvement$200,000Human Services$119,200Arts & Culture$21,000

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.

Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy FundNY8.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 WIRELESS 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

2get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%

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: OBJECTIVE ZERO FOUNDATION.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~10 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 7 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

7 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 4.5× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 814324563 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 OBJECTIVE ZERO FOUNDATION, 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

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 10 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 20% 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 Wireless Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Wireless 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 WIRELESS 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?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

11 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2024.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The Wireless Foundation?

More from the funding graph

THE WIRELESS 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?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

11 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2024.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The Wireless Foundation?

More from the funding graph