Skip to content
Chang K Park Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Chang K Park 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.

$2.2M
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
7
States reached
$600k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Education$5.8MPublic Benefit$3.1MArts & Culture$2.9MInternational$2.7MFood & Nutrition$2.7MHealth$535kReligion$390kScience & Tech$300kOther$0
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $460k
  • $250k+4 grants · $1.7M
$100,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$31M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BREAD FOR THE WORLD INSTI$600,000
WNET$500,000
CARE$350,000
CATHOLIC ACADEMY OF BRIDG$250,000
UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY$100,000
RIVERSIDE CHURCH$100,000
CURE BLINDNESS PROJECT$100,000
CITY BAR JUSTICE CENTER$60,000
VILLAGE HEALTH WORKS$50,000
FULLERTON PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH$50,000
EVA'S VILLAGE$20,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 97% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%AMERICAN PROMISE EDUCATIONAL FUND: $300k → 8%INEQUALITY MEDIA: $100k → 10%KOREAN UNITED METHODIST CHURCH OF GREAT NECK: $80k → 6%BREAD FOR THE WORLD INSTI: $600k → 14%MICHIGAN TECH FUND: $500k → 14%CATHOLIC ACADEMY OF BRIDG: $250k → 9%CARE: $600k → 13%CURE BLINDNESS PROJECT: $100k → 9%HIMALAYAN CATARACT PROJECT: $100k → 9%INEQUALITY MEDIA: $100k → 10%BREAD FOR THE WORLD INSTITUTE: $450k → 14%MICHIGAN TECH FUND: $100k → 14%CATHOLIC ACADEMY OF BRIDGEPORT: $100k → 9%CARE: $400k → 13%OMNIA INSTITUTE: $100k → 14%HCP CURE BLINDNESS: $100k → 9%HIMALAYAN CATARACT PROJECT: $100k → 9%INEQUALITY MEDIA: $100k → 10%BREAD FOR THE WORLD INSTITUTE: $350k → 14%MICHIGAN TECH FUND: $100k → 14%CATHOLIC ACADEMY OF BRIDGEPORT: $70k → 9%CARE: $350k → 13%HIMALAYAN CATARACT PROJECT: $100k → 9%INEQUALITY MEDIA: $100k → 10%BREAD FOR THE WORLD INSTI: $250k → 14%MICHIAN TECH FUND: $72k → 14%CARE: $337k → 13%INEQUALITY MEDIA: $100k → 10%BREAD FOR THE WORLD INSTITUTE: $125k → 14%CARE: $250k → 13%BREAD FOR THE WORLD INSTITUTE: $100k → 14%CARE: $200k → 13%COMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND: $817k → 14%COMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND: $599k → 14%COMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND: $572k → 14%COMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND: $320k → 14%COMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND: $75k → 14%UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY: $3.3M → 17%UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY: $457k → 17%BREAD FOR THE WORLD INSTITUTE: $431k → 17%BREAD FOR THE WORLD INSTITUTE: $222k → 17%BREAD FOR THE WORLD INSTITUTE: $175k → 17%UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY: $143k → 17%DRUM MAJOR INSITUTE: $110k → 17%UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY: $100k → 17%RIVERSIDE CHURCH: $100k → 17%DEMOS: $100k → 17%DEMOS: $100k → 17%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

VT
IL
MI
NY
MA
NJ
CT
CA
VA
TN
DC
GA
FL
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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$18M · 22 repeat orgs$1.1M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +37% since the first grant, against -40% for those funded once.

22 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

22
11

Total granted

$18M
$782k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+37%
-40%

Still filing today

64%
27%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $270k 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
InternationalEducationPublic BenefitArts & CultureCommunity ImprovementFood & NutritionOther
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

  • UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
    8× · 2017–2025 · $4.2M · revenue +49%
  • CC
    COMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND
    7× · 2017–2023 · $2.5M · revenue +266%
  • COOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $2.1M · revenue +37%

Funded once

  • AP
    AMERICAN PROMISE EDUCATION FUND INC
    one grant, 2024 · $300k · revenue 0%
  • OI
    OMNIA INSTITUTE
    one grant, 2023 · $100k
  • KU
    KOREAN UNITED METHODIST CHURCH OF GREAT NECK
    one grant, 2017 · $80k
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
The Common Application Inc

The common application is a not-for-profit membership organization of over 1,100 colleges and universities across the globe committed to access, equity, and integrity in the college admission process. every year, over 1.5 million students…

Education
2
Open Markets Institute

The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.

Education
3
Center for Democracy and Technology

Advocating for public policies that advance democratic values in the digital age.

Civil Rights
4
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education
5
Manhattan Institute for Policy Research Inc

The manhattan institute is a community of scholars, journalists, activists, and civic leaders dedicated to advancing opportunity, individual liberty, and the rule of law in america and its great cities.

Public Benefit
6
Peter G Peterson Institute for International Economics

The peterson institute for international economics (piie) is an independent nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to strengthening prosperity and human welfare in the global economy through expert analysis and practical…

Social Science
7
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research

The american enterprise institute is a community of scholars and supporters committed to expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity, and strengthening free enterprise. aei pursues these ideals through independent thinking and the…

Social Science
8
President and Fellows of Harvard College

Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.

Education
9
Furman University

The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.

Education
10
Public Media Nj Inc

To bring quality public television programs and resources to communities throughout new jersey and its tri-state neighbors. its content, both on-air and online, aims to reflect the diverse

Arts & Culture
11
Boston Architectural College

The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.

—
12
International Food Policy Research Institute

International food policy research institute's (ifpri) vision is a world free of hunger and malnutrition. ifpri's mission is to provide research-based policy solutions that sustainably reduce poverty and end hunger and malnutrition.

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Inequality Media; the most unlike its peers is Michigan Tech Fund. 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

18 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. 18 of the 37 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/18
Grantees still filing
11/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY: $4,236,553 · EducationUNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARYMichigan Tech Fund: $772,000 · EducationMichigan Tech Fund+1 more: $10,000 · EducationCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC: $2,137,000 · InternationalCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTAN…Bread for the World Institute: $1,025,000 · InternationalBread for the World Inst…HIMALAYAN CATARACT PROJECT INC: $600,000 · InternationalHIMALAYAN CATARACT PROJE…VILLAGE HEALTH WORKS: $390,000 · InternationalVILLAGE HEALTH WORKSBREAD FOR THE WORLD INSTI: $850,000 · OtherBREAD FOR THE WORLD INS…BREAD FOR THE WORLD INSTITUTE: $828,200 · OtherBREAD FOR THE WORLD INS…CATHOLIC ACADEMY OF BRIDGEPORT INC: $390,000 · OtherCATHOLIC ACADEMY OF BRI…AMERICAN PROMISE EDUCATION FUND INC: $300,000 · OtherAMERICAN PROMISE EDUCAT…CATHOLIC ACADEMY OF BRIDG: $300,000 · OtherCATHOLIC ACADEMY OF BRI…THE BREAKTHROUGH: $300,000 · OtherTHE BREAKTHROUGH+16 more: $946,884 · Other+16 moreWNET: $2,368,370 · Arts & CultureWNETINEQUALITY MEDIA: $500,000 · Arts & CultureINEQUALITY MEDIACOMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND: $2,457,276 · Public BenefitCOMMON CAUSE EDU…DEMOS A NETWORK FOR IDEAS AND ACTION LTD: $230,000 · Public BenefitDEMOS A NETWORK …DEMOCRACY MATTERS INSTITUTE INC: $109,950 · Public BenefitASSOCIATION OF THE BAR OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK FUND INC: $230,000 · Social ScienceFRIENDS OF UBUNYE INC: $50,000 · Community ImprovementEVA'S VILLAGE INC: $20,000 · Community Improvement
Education$5,018,553International$4,152,000Other$3,915,084Arts & Culture$2,868,370Public Benefit$2,797,226Social Science$230,000Community Improvement$70,000

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 budgetUNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY: $4,236,553 over 8y, 18% of budgetCOMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND: $2,457,276 over 7y, 11% of budgetWNET: $2,368,370 over 6y, 0.5% of budgetCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC: $2,137,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetBread for the World Institute: $1,025,000 over 4y, 6.7% of budgetMichigan Tech Fund: $772,000 over 4y, 1.8% of budgetHIMALAYAN CATARACT PROJECT INC: $600,000 over 8y, 1.4% of budgetINEQUALITY MEDIA: $500,000 over 5y, 10% of budgetVILLAGE HEALTH WORKS: $390,000 over 9y, 1.0% of budgetAMERICAN PROMISE EDUCATION FUND INC: $300,000 over 1y, 7.6% of budgetDEMOS A NETWORK FOR IDEAS AND ACTION LTD: $230,000 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetASSOCIATION OF THE BAR OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK FUND INC: $230,000 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetDEMOCRACY MATTERS INSTITUTE INC: $109,950 over 4y, 40% of budgetALZHEIMER'S DISEASE AND RELATED DISORDERS NEW YORK CITY INC: $45,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetEVA'S VILLAGE INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAlliance to End Hunger: $20,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetTHE FOUNDATION FOR CITY COLLEGE: $10,000 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 UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY ↗
  • Who funds COMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND ↗
  • Who funds WNET ↗
  • Who funds COOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC ↗
  • Who funds Bread for the World Institute ↗
  • Who funds Michigan Tech Fund ↗
  • Who funds HIMALAYAN CATARACT PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds INEQUALITY MEDIA ↗
  • Who funds VILLAGE HEALTH WORKS ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN PROMISE EDUCATION FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds DEMOS A NETWORK FOR IDEAS AND ACTION LTD ↗
  • Who funds ASSOCIATION OF THE BAR OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds DEMOCRACY MATTERS INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF UBUNYE INC ↗
  • Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE AND RELATED DISORDERS NEW YORK CITY INC ↗
  • Who funds EVA'S VILLAGE INC ↗
  • Who funds Alliance to End Hunger ↗
  • Who funds THE FOUNDATION FOR CITY COLLEGE ↗

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.

Ge Aerospace Foundati…Morgan Stanley Global…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…The Bank of America C…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Ge Aerospace FoundationCT11.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ge Aerospace Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · 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 Chang K Park Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Chang K Park Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 19%
  • Eva's Village Inc: 19% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
6report 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, FY20–25
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.

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 37 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 Chang K Park’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