Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Ayz Family Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$271k
Granted FY2024still arriving
5
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What you fund
0198% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172024.

Education$1.3MHealth$1.2MRecreation & Sports$130kScience & Tech$54kAnimals$50kReligion$15kArts & Culture$9kMembership Benefit$5kOther$0
02FY2024 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $1k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $260k
$60,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$8.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION$100,000
NORTH AMERICAN CHINESE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION$100,000
SPORT CHAMPIONS ALLIANCE FOUNDATION$60,000
TABLE TENNIS AMERICA FOUNDATION$10,000
US HUNAN ASSOCIATION$1,000
02The need
03

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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 96% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%CHILDRENS CANCER RESEARCH FUND: $311 → 11%CHINESE BIOSCIENCE ASSOCIATION: $4k → 7%FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH: $500 → 8%UCI FOUNDATION: $25k → 10%NORTH AMERICAN CHINESE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $100k → 10%WWII PACIFIC WAR MEMORIAL HALL: $2k → 10%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT SANTA CRUZ: $750 → 13%THE U C DAVIS FOUNDATION: $50k → 16%The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center: $50k → 16%TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY: $100k → 22%SOCIETY FOR IN VITRO BIOLOGY: $50k → 8%NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $100k → 7%UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO: $50k → 14%VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $150k → 22%SPORT CHAMPIONS ALLIANCE FOUNDATION: $60k → 10%US HUNAN ASSOCIATION: $1k → 7%CHINESE PERFORMING ARTS OF AMERICA: $5k → 8%UCI FOUNDATION: $25k → 10%NORTH AMERICAN CHINESE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $50k → 10%THE U C DAVIS FOUNDATION: $50k → 16%TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY: $50k → 22%university of illinois at chicago: $50k → 14%VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $150k → 22%SPORT CHAMPIONS ALLIANCE FOUNDATION: $60k → 10%US HUNAN ASSOCIASTION: $2k → 8%NORTH AMERICAN CHINESE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $50k → 10%The U C Davis Foundation: $10k → 16%texas a&m university: $50k → 22%VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $100k → 22%IMMANUELS CHINESE ALLIANCE CHURCH: $10k → 10%FOOTHILL COVENANT CHURCH: $400 → 8%NORTH AMERICAN CHINESE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $50k → 10%IMMANUEL CHINESE ALLIANCE CHURCH: $2k → 10%TABLE TENNIS AMERICA FOUNDATION: $10k → 10%UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE: $250k → 10%BRI FOUNDATION: $2k → 10%UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE: $250k → 10%UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE: $250k → 10%UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE: $200k → 10%UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE: $150k → 10%RENO COMMUNITY CHINESE CHURCH: $2k → 10%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 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.

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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$2.3M · 9 repeat orgs$335k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +66% since the first grant, against -21% for the ones you funded once.

9 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
15

Total granted

$2.3M
$224k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+66%
-21%

Still filing today

56%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 59% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $111k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EducationArts & CultureSocial ScienceYouth DevelopmentRecreation & SportsInternationalOther

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

  • VC
    VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY FOUNDAT
    3× · 2021–2023 · $400k · revenue +113%
  • SC
    SPORT CHAMPIONS ALLIANCE FOUNDATION
    2× · 2023–2024 · $120k · revenue +15% · 100% of their budget
  • TU
    THE UC DAVIS FOUNDATION
    3× · 2017–2019 · $110k · revenue +66%

Funded once

  • LU
    LEIDEN UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2022 · $50k
  • SF
    SOCIETY FOR IN VITRO BIOLOGYgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $50k · revenue +65%
  • DW
    dalian weisheng animal welfare research center
    one grant, 2017 · $50k

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.

1
Uc Chinese Alumni Foundation
2
University of Science and Technology of China Alumni Foundation

Promote the excellence of members of USTC and helping the students with finacial needs. Promote the academic and cultural exchange between USTC and researchers and students in USA Raising donations from alumni and elsewhere. Present…

International
3
Center for Advanced China Research
4
Chiao-Tung University Alumni Association of Northern California

Alumni networking,and foster alumni to promote the scientific, literary, educational and charitable actiyity in the community.

Science & Tech
5
Shanghai Jiao Tong University Foundation of America (Sjtufa)
Education
6
Taiwanese-American Foundation
7
Foundation for Chinese Cultural Heritage
Philanthropy
8
Us - China Policy Foundation
9
Xiamen University Education Foundation of N Americ
Education
10
Hua Xia Education Foundation
Education
11
The Association for Us-China Exchange

To provide a forum for education and training for students and professionals between universities of US and China. To enhance the living qualities of the people between the two countries.

International
12
California University - Silicon Valley

Providing professional training of Chinese Medicine (TCM), including acupuncture, Chinese herbology, acupressure, Qigong and so on, granting the students Masters degree. Its a three to four years teaching program.

Education

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of California Irvine Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Ww Ii Pacific War Memorial Hall. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

04the grantee network

13 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 13 of the 27 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/13
Grantees still filing
7/13
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE — $1,100,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF NEVADA SCHOOL OF MEDICINETEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY — $200,000 · OtherTEXAS A&M UNIVERSITYSPORT CHAMPIONS ALLIANCE FOUNDATION — $120,000 · OtherSPORT CHAMPIONS ALLIANCE FOUNDATIONuniversity of illinois at chicago — $100,000 · Otheruniversity of illinois at chicago+13 more — $175,961 · Other+13 moreVIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY FOUNDAT — $400,000 · EducationVIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVE…THE UC DAVIS FOUNDATION — $110,000 · EducationTHE UC DAVIS FOUNDATIONNATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION — $100,000 · EducationNATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY …UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA IRVINE FOUNDATION — $50,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA IR…NORTH AMERICAN CHINESE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION — $250,000 · Youth DevelopmentNORTH AMER…SOCIETY FOR IN VITRO BIOLOGY — $50,000 · Social ScienceTable Tennis America Foundation — $10,000 · Recreation & SportsChinese Performing Arts of America — $5,000 · Arts & CultureWW II PACIFIC WAR MEMORIAL HALL — $2,000 · Arts & CultureCHINESE BIOSCIENCE ASSOCIATION — $4,000 · Science & Tech
Other$1,695,961Education$660,000Youth Development$250,000Social Science$50,000Recreation & Sports$10,000Arts & Culture$7,000Science & Tech$4,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetVIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY FOUNDAT — $400,000 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetNORTH AMERICAN CHINESE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION — $250,000 over 4y, 52% of budgetSPORT CHAMPIONS ALLIANCE FOUNDATION — $120,000 over 2y, 100% of budgetTHE UC DAVIS FOUNDATION — $110,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION — $100,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA IRVINE FOUNDATION — $50,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTable Tennis America Foundation — $10,000 over 1y, 5.2% of budgetChinese Performing Arts of America — $5,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetCHINESE BIOSCIENCE ASSOCIATION — $4,000 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetWW II PACIFIC WAR MEMORIAL HALL — $2,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetCHILDREN'S CANCER RESEARCH FUND — $311 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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.

American Online Giving Foundation IncDE6.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 organization Ayz Family 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
202122232425
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 20%
  • Society for in Vitro Biology20% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
typical government reliance, FY2025

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 27 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph