Grants by the Numbers

The Digital Trust Foundation granted over $6,200,000 in its core phase of grantmaking, which involved a series of RFPs issued in the first half of 2015. These grants are summarized below. In order to disburse its remaining funds, the Foundation gave 14 small supplemental grants to existing grantees in 2016 and one final grant of all remaining funds in 2019. These grants are detailed in the Foundation’s final report.

Grant Numbers by Program Area

 Program Area                                                     Number of Grants   Total Amount
1. Privacy Education for Youth 11 $1,290,000
2. Understanding Socioeconomic Status and Online Privacy and Security
 6 $1,793,480
3. Assessing, Preventing, and Addressing Digital Abuse  9 $1,651,000
4. General Funding for Promotion of Online Privacy, Safety, and Security 12 $1,400,000

Grant Numbers by Award Amount

Range  Number   of Grants 
$40,000 – $99,000 8
$100,000 – $199,000 23
$200,000 – $299,000 4
$300,000 – $400,000 1
Over $400,000 2

Geographic Focus

Most of the funded projects tackle privacy, safety, and security issues at a national or general level. However, several grants focus on a particular geographic region, including:

  • Charlotte, North Carolina
  • Detroit, Michigan
  • Harris County, Texas
  • Los Angeles, California
  • New York, New York
  • Rochester Metro Area, New York
  • Rural Appalachia
  • The State of California

Population Focus

Some grants focus on the general U.S. population while others home in on specific categories or groups, including:

  • Middle school students
  • Teens and young adults
  • Low-income youth
  • Parents
  • Low-income adults
  • Teachers and school administrators
  • Consumers
  • Workers
  • Low-wage workers
  • Survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, and other digital abuse

Main Grant Activity

It may be useful to get a picture of how many grants focus mainly on conducting pure research, versus developing and disseminating informational resources, versus providing direct services. Classifying the grants in these categories is a bit difficult because the lines among the activities blur. For instance, all of the research grants have a dissemination component (which arguably puts them in the resource development category), most of the grants focused on resource development have a hefty research component, and many of the direct services grants require formal evaluation (which is a type of research). The following is a rough attempt to break down the grants according to their primary activity:

Main Activity Percentage of Grants
Direct Services 16%
Resource Development 50%
Research 34%