· Public charity
Asianetwork Inc
Educational asian studies development; to promote the study of asia on member campuses; send faculty and students to asia; annual conference; publish journal; asianetwork exchange; send consultants to member campuses.
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 13 grants below total $241,586 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $315,500 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $73,914 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 · $29k
- $10k–50k9 grants · $213k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| TRINITY UNIVERSITY | $38,000 |
| SOUTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY | $38,000 |
| KNOX COLLEGE | $38,000 |
| WEBSTER UNIVERSITY | $29,500 |
| UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL ARKANSAS | $29,253 |
| ROANOKE COLLEGE | $10,000 |
| COLGATE UNIVERSITY | $10,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF FINDLAY | $10,000 |
| CARLETON COLLEGE | $10,000 |
| LUTHER COLLEGE | $9,580 |
| ROSE HULMAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY | $7,853 |
| RHODES COLLEGE | $5,700 |
| THE COLLEGE OF NEW JERSEY | $5,700 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 68% of your 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +20% since the first grant, against +19% for the ones you funded once.
14 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down; 8 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, 31% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $168k went to new ones.
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
LEWIS & CLARK COLLEGE4× · 2017–2022 · $120k · revenue +35%
ST LAWRENCE UNIVERSITY2× · 2022–2023 · $80k · revenue +2%- KCKNOX COLLEGE2× · 2023–2024 · $76k · revenue +21%
Funded once
- DUDENISON UNIVERSITYone grant, 2021 · $60k · revenue +1%
Bucknell Universityone grant, 2023 · $44k · revenue +12%- NCNorth Central Collegeone grant, 2019 · $40k · revenue +11%
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.
Wilson college empowers students to be confident and critical thinkers, creative visionaries, effective communicators, honorable leaders, and agents of justice.
The university's goal in the coming decade is to advance learning through the integration of teaching, research and service to others. the core of this goal is to prepare graduates to engage with the world and lead lives of meaning. to do…
Bates is a college of the liberal arts and sciences, and is a coeducational, nonsectarian, residential college with special commitments to academic rigor, and to assuring in all of its efforts the dignity of each individual, and access to…
Through innovative learning opportunities, individual student attention, and an unwavering commitment to inclusive educational access, simpson college cultivates a diverse community of learners to lead lives of meaning and purpose.
As a diverse community of learners, we cultivate integrity, curiosity, connection and resilience.
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
to provide a rigorous and transformative liberal arts education that prepares students to become thoughtful, engaged citizens.
At Roger Williams University, students are prepared to be thinkers and doers ready to solve challenging problems with innovative solutions. RWU offers robust offerings of undergraduate, graduate and professional programs across eight…
Education - lagrange college challenges the minds and inspires the souls of its students. founded in 1831 and committed to its relationship with the united methodist church and its wesleyan and liberal arts traditions, the college supports…
Greensboro College provides a liberal arts education grounded in the traditions of the United Methodist Church and fosters the intellectual, social, and spiritual development of all students while supporting their individual needs.
At sarah lawrence college, our mission is to graduate citizens of the world who are diverse in every definition of the word, who take intellectual and creative risks, and who are able to focus exceptional intellectual discipline (continued…
Rooted in the liberal arts & sciences & lutheran expression of the christian faith, & is committed to offering a challenging education that develops qualities of mind, spirit, & body necessary for a rewarding life of leadership & service…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Carleton College and the most unlike its peers is Seattle University. 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 82 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% 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 13% 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.
42 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. 42 of the 52 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 LEWIS & CLARK COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds ROANOKE COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds AUSTIN COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds ST LAWRENCE UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds KNOX COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds MORAVIAN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds KENYON COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds DENISON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds MONMOUTH COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds WARREN WILSON COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds The University of Findlay ↗
- Who funds HOPE COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds Bucknell University ↗
- Who funds North Central College ↗
- Who funds Bowdoin College ↗
- Who funds Lake Forest College ↗
- Who funds Wilmington College ↗
- Who funds SOUTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds Trinity University ↗
- Who funds DICKINSON COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF THE SOUTH ↗
- Who funds SEATTLE UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds The College of Idaho Inc ↗
- Who funds Webster University ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL AR FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CARLETON COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds SKIDMORE COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds COLLEGE OF SAINT BENEDICT ↗
- Who funds HOFSTRA UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds GETTYSBURG COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds RANDOLPH COLLEGE INC ↗
- Who funds Eckerd College ↗
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: Tulsa Community Foundation · American Chemical Society · Ibm International Foundation · Shell USA Company Foundation · Ge Aerospace Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Endowment Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving 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 Asianetwork Inc 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.
- Lewis & Clark College — 2% of income from government
- Eckerd College — 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.