Skip to content
Brian and Caris Chan Family Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Private foundation

Brian and Caris Chan Family 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.

$16k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$6k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0188% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$927kPhilanthropy$250kHealth$50kCivil Rights$48kHuman Services$26kFood & Nutrition$12kInternational$6kEducation$3kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$3,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$27k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
EVANGELICAL FRIENDS MISSION$6,000
Individual grant recipient$3,000
TEACH BEYOND$3,000
COMPASSION INTERNATIONAL$2,874
GATEWAY FRIENDS CHURCH$1,000
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 (FY22–23, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%A STABLE SPACE: $1k → 14%A STABLE SPACE: $200 → 14%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.

Which US states its grants reach

MN
PA
CA
CO
KS
AR
TN
DC
AL
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.

72%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.0M · 14 repeat orgs$406k to everyone else

14 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
16

Total granted

$1.0M
$397k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+25%
+31%

Still filing today

50%
31%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 43% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $9k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
ReligionCivil RightsPhilanthropyHuman ServicesFood & NutritionInternationalOther
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

  • ST
    STAND TO REASON
    7× · 2017–2024 · $426k · revenue +65%
  • DG
    DESIRING GOD MINISTRIES
    5× · 2017–2021 · $150k · revenue +108%
  • NC
    NORTH COUNTY PROJECT
    3× · 2019–2021 · $59k · revenue +6%

Funded once

  • LF
    LIFERAY FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2020 · $250k · revenue -58%
  • WM
    WPCC-OBRIA MEDICAL CLINICS
    one grant, 2021 · $50k
  • GP
    GOSPEL PROJECTS (DBA CROSS)
    one grant, 2018 · $25k
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
Leadership Resources International

International missions: this organization is an international mission agency focusing on leadership development through teaching of the scriptures

Religion
2
Evangelism Partners International
Religion
3
Instituto De Estudios Teologicos

Conference

Education
4
More International Ministries

To spread the gospel of jesus christ through crusades

Religion
5
Faith Speaks World Outreach

World outreach

Religion
6
Explore God Network
—
7
Christian Lingua Services
Religion
8
International Impact Ministries in
Religion
9
Lucerna Press

Non profit translation and publishing company

Arts & Culture
10
Global Gospel Initiative Inc
Religion
11
Grateful Shepherd Ministries

Training pastors and leaders in christian faith

Religion
12
Timothy Two Project International

Reaching and teaching pastors in the majority world.

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Desiring God Ministries; the most unlike its peers is Elevation Story. 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 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. 13 of the 32 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/13
Grantees still filing
11/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

STAND TO REASON: $426,000 · ReligionSTAND TO REASONDESIRING GOD MINISTRIES: $150,000 · ReligionDESIRING GOD MINISTRIESNORTH COUNTY PROJECT: $59,000 · ReligionNORTH COUNTY PROJECTTraining Leaders International: $37,500 · ReligionTraining Leaders International+3 more: $16,250 · ReligionCONTINENTAL CHRISTIAN CENTER: $95,000 · OtherCONTINENTAL CHRISTIAN CENTERIndividual grant recipient: $87,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientGATEWAY FRIENDS CHURCH: $75,228 · OtherGATEWAY FRIENDS CHURCHWPCC-OBRIA MEDICAL CLINICS: $50,000 · OtherWPCC-OBRIA MEDICAL CLINICSGOSPEL PROJECTS (DBA CROSS): $25,000 · OtherGOSPEL PROJECTS (DBA CROSS)FAMILY LIFE: $20,000 · Other+14 more: $77,200 · Other+14 moreLIFERAY FOUNDATION: $250,000 · PhilanthropyLIFERAY FOUNDATIONINSTITUTE ON RELIGION & DEMOCRACY INC: $38,000 · Civil RightsELEVATION STORY: $12,000 · Food & NutritionCompassion International Incorporated: $8,384 · InternationalA STABLE SPACE: $1,405 · Human Services
Religion$688,750Other$429,428Philanthropy$250,000Civil Rights$38,000Food & Nutrition$12,000International$8,384Human Services$1,405

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSTAND TO REASON: $426,000 over 7y, 4.8% of budgetLIFERAY FOUNDATION: $250,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetDESIRING GOD MINISTRIES: $150,000 over 5y, 1.0% of budgetNORTH COUNTY PROJECT: $59,000 over 3y, 8.5% of budgetINSTITUTE ON RELIGION & DEMOCRACY INC: $38,000 over 4y, 1.4% of budgetTraining Leaders International: $37,500 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetLIFELINE CHILDREN'S SERVICES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetA STABLE SPACE: $1,405 over 2y, 4.8% of budgetHARVEST HAVEN INC DBA HARVEST HAVEN COMMUNITY SERVICE CTR: $1,250 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetJONI AND FRIENDS: $200 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.

  • Who funds STAND TO REASON ↗
  • Who funds LIFERAY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds DESIRING GOD MINISTRIES ↗
  • Who funds NORTH COUNTY PROJECT ↗
  • Who funds INSTITUTE ON RELIGION & DEMOCRACY INC ↗
  • Who funds Training Leaders International ↗
  • Who funds ELEVATION STORY ↗
  • Who funds BIBLINE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Compassion International Incorporated ↗
  • Who funds LIFELINE CHILDREN'S SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds A STABLE SPACE ↗
  • Who funds HARVEST HAVEN INC DBA HARVEST HAVEN COMMUNITY SERVICE CTR ↗
  • Who funds JONI AND FRIENDS ↗

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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Liferay FoundationChristian Community F…Servant FoundationRaymond James Charita…Natl Christian Charit…The Blackbaud Giving …American Endowment Fo…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Liferay FoundationCA17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Liferay Foundation · Christian Community Foundation Inc · Servant Foundation · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Brian and Caris Chan Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Brian and Caris Chan Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Brian and Caris Chan Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Brian and Caris Chan Family Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 32 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Brian and Caris Chan Family’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