· Private foundation
Chun-Cheng Cheng Charitable and Educational 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| THE WOMEN'S HOME | $5,000 |
| FORMOSAN ASSOCIATION FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRS | $2,000 |
| DOWN SYNDROME CONNECTION OF BAY AREA | $2,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY20–25, $21k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those 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.
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 +31% since the first grant, against +25% for the ones you funded once.
6 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- TWTHE WOMEN'S HOME4× · 2020–2025 · $21k · revenue +31%
- SUSTUF UNITED FUND INC2× · 2020–2021 · $10k · revenue +42%
- THTAIWANESE HERITAGE SOCIETY OF HOUSTON3× · 2017–2020 · $2k · revenue +58%
Funded once
- SSPARKgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $50k · revenue +25%
- TCTAIWANESE CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE OF NORTH AMERICAone grant, 2018 · $5k · revenue +17%
- TTTHE TRUSTEES OF PRINCETON UNIVERSITYone grant, 2017 · $2k
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.
Global Taiwan Institutes (GTI) mission is to enhance the relationship between Taiwan and other countries, especially the United States, through policy research and programs that promote better public understanding about Taiwan and its…
One of the purposes shall be to aid the Chiao Tung Universities in financing their educational activities on mainland and Taiwan of China. Another purpose shall be to aid the alumni and faculties of the Universities and their immediate…
Promote understanding of the world, its people, politics, economies and cultures, in order to enable the greater houston community to better understand its role and participate more effectively in a global world.
Chamber of commerce
Established in 1997, TEFNA has established, fostered and maintained educational exchanges and collaboration between Tsinghua University in China and other universities, colleges, companies and industries in the US and other countries…
1) Support academic research and talents cultivation in Fudan University. 2) Promote higher education in Fudan University and other educational organizations in China. 3) Strengthen global cooperations of education and research. 4) Enhance…
The chinese community center's mission is to bridge east & west by enriching families with educational, cultural, and social programs.
To promote leadership and cultural awareness of taiwanese americans, and improve the quality of life of taiwanese americans in the united states
The Asian Chamber Foundation provides opportunities of educational programming and funding support for the Asian community in economic growth and resiliency. We have a long standing impact since 1995 with scholarships and now expanded to…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Greater Houston Community Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Taiwanese Chambers of Commerce of North America. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
10 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. 10 of the 16 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 SPARK ↗
- Who funds CY-FAIR EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE WOMEN'S HOME ↗
- Who funds STUF UNITED FUND INC ↗
- Who funds GREATER HOUSTON COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds TAIWANESE CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE OF NORTH AMERICA ↗
- Who funds Formosan Association for Public Affairs ↗
- Who funds TAIWANESE HERITAGE SOCIETY OF HOUSTON ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL LEADERSHIP FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
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: Shell USA Company Foundation · 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 Chun-Cheng Cheng Charitable and Educational 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.
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.