Skip to content
Bk Asher Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Private foundation

Bk Asher Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$3k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$3k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Health$23kHuman Services$15kScience & Tech$14kEmployment$7kYouth Development$3kEnvironment$3kArts & Culture$3kPhilanthropy$3kOther$0
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$141k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$2,500
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY23–23, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%INTERMOUNTAIN CHILDREN'S HOME: $3k → 9%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
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.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$58k · 6 repeat orgs$11k to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
3

Total granted

$58k
$9k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+27%
+32%

Still filing today

67%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k 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
HealthEmploymentHuman ServicesRecreation & SportsEnvironmentOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • CH
    Children's Hospital Los Angeles
    4× · 2020–2023 · $13k · revenue +27%
  • ID
    Intermountain Deaconess Childrens Services
    4× · 2017–2022 · $12k · revenue +8%
  • VC
    VALLEY COMMUNITY COUNSELING CLINIC
    4× · 2017–2020 · $10k · revenue +24%

Funded once

  • IC
    Intermountain Childrens Homegraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $3k · revenue +32%
  • GIRLSTART
    one grant, 2023 · $3k · revenue -35%
  • FO
    Friends of Auwahi Forest Restoration Projectgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $3k · revenue +569%
How this is measured

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

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Valley Children's Healthcare

To support health care activities and programs for the benefit of, and to provide health care services to, children and adults in central california with diseases, disorders and other health problems of pediatric origin, and to enhance the…

Health
2
Collaborative for Children

The mission of Collaborative for Children is to meaningfully improve the quality of early childhood education and care for Greater Houston's children through those most influential in their lives.

Human Services
3
Southwest Utah Community Health Center

Making lives better in southwest utah by providing accessible, quality health care, regardless of financial, language, or cultural barriers.

Health
4
United Children's Services of Bennington County Inc

Children's services

Human Services
5
Gallup Community Health

Gallup community health's mission is to provide excellent and accessible medical care to our community, regardless of ability to pay.

Health
6
Columbia Valley Community Health

The mission of columbia valley community health is partnering to achieve optimal health and wellness with compassion and respect for all.

Health
7
Childrens House International

Children's house international provides ethical adoption services, child focused recruitment, and family support. we support disadvantaged children with humanitarian aid in countries worldwide.

—
8
The Children's Hospital of Alabama

The mission of Children's of Alabama is to provide the finest pediatric health services to all children in an environment that fosters excellence in research and medical education. Children's will be an advocate for all children and work…

Health
9
Children's Healthcare of California

The primary exempt purpose of children's healthcare of california includes without limitation the receipt of distributions and grants for the making of distributions and grants to children's hospital of orange county (choc) and to…

Health
10
Chac Fka Community Health Awareness Council

Chac seeks to improve lives and strengthen communities through access to comprehensive and culturally responsive mental health services in northern santa clara county.

Health
11
California Childrens Hospital Association

Our mission is to advance the well-being of children, promote access to high quality pediatric health care, and ensure the long-term viability of childrens hospitals.

—
12
Children's Home Society of Idaho Inc

Our mission is to improve the lives of children in our community.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Greater Houston Community Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Valley Community Counseling Clinic. 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

8 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 11 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ATXELERATOR INC: $13,500 · OtherATXELERATOR INCIntermountain Deaconess Childrens Services: $12,000 · OtherIntermountain Deaconess Childrens ServicesCENTRAL TEXAS MEDIA FOUNDATION: $2,750 · OtherCENTRAL TEXAS MEDIA FOUNDATIONIndividual grant recipient: $2,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipientChildren's Hospital Los Angeles: $13,000 · HealthChildren's Hospital Los AngelesVALLEY COMMUNITY COUNSELING CLINIC: $9,750 · HealthVALLEY COMMUNITY COUNSELING CLINICGOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF CENTRAL TEXAS: $6,500 · EmploymentGOODWILL I…Intermountain Childrens Home: $3,000 · Human ServicesGIRLSTART: $3,000 · Recreation & SportsFriends of Auwahi Forest Restoration Project: $2,750 · EnvironmentGREATER HOUSTON COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $2,500 · Philanthropy
Other$30,750Health$22,750Employment$6,500Human Services$3,000Recreation & Sports$3,000Environment$2,750Philanthropy$2,500

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetChildren's Hospital Los Angeles: $13,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetIntermountain Deaconess Childrens Services: $12,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetVALLEY COMMUNITY COUNSELING CLINIC: $9,750 over 4y, 2.1% of budgetGOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF CENTRAL TEXAS: $6,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetIntermountain Childrens Home: $3,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetGIRLSTART: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFriends of Auwahi Forest Restoration Project: $2,750 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetGREATER HOUSTON COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile Foundation
Amazonsmile FoundationWA2.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Bk Asher Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Bk Asher Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 11 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

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

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2024, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Bk Asher’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home