Skip to content

· Public charity

Civic Leadership USA Clusa

Our mission is to strengthen the status, image, participation, influence and collaboration in civic engagement of asian americans.

$21k
Granted FY2023
1
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$16k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2023.

Public Benefit$998kHealth$393kScience & Tech$306kCivil Rights$134kEmployment$30kCrime & Legal$11kArts & Culture$8kEducation$6k
02FY2023 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $15,500, the rows itemized in this filing. The $21,480 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $5,980 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$15,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$19k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$15,500
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY19–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 62% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%Asian American Womens Polici: $25k → 16%AAUC: $93k → 11%Individuals- Internship grant: $164k → 7%ASIAN LAW ALLIANCE: $11k → 8%80-20 United: $90k → 10%The 1990 Institute: $13k → 10%APAPA: $149k → 12%Civic Leadership Academy: $330k → 13%UCAUnited Chinese Americans: $30k → 14%The business boutique Trainin: $25k → 10%Coalition for a better Chines: $20k → 14%AAUC: $45k → 11%Individuals- Internship grant: $104k → 7%DINGDING TV: $188k → 8%Asian Pacific Islander: $10k → 10%APAPA: $38k → 12%NaFFAA: $23k → 14%AAUC: $44k → 11%Individuals- Internship grant: $22k → 7%DINGDING TV: $103k → 8%Asian Pacific Islander APACC: $8k → 10%CA Asian Pacific Chamber: $63k → 12%APIA Vote: $100k → 14%Internship grant: $16k → 7%DINGDING TV: $65k → 8%Natl Federation of Filipino: $10k → 14%APALI: $38k → 8%NaFFA: $30k → 14%Silicon Valley CommunityMedia: $8k → 8%United Chinese Americans: $8k → 14%Asian&PacificAmericanAdvocate: $6k → 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

AK
MN
IL
NY
MA
CA
DC
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.

54%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.0M · 4 repeat orgs$872k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +17% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2023, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
20

Total granted

$1.0M
$856k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+17%
0%

Still filing today

50%
35%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $16k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23
Civil RightsHealthInternationalArts & CultureOther
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

  • CC
    CENTRAL CALIFORNIA BLEEDING DISORDERS FOUNDATION
    3× · 2019–2021 · $355k · revenue -28% · 70% of their budget
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    3× · 2019–2022 · $290k
  • AP
    Asian Pacific Islander American Public Affairs - Community Education Foundation
    2× · 2019–2021 · $187k · revenue +17%

Funded once

  • CL
    Civic Leadership Academy
    one grant, 2021 · $330k
  • AP
    Asian & Pacific Islander American Votegraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $100k · revenue +261% · 28% of their budget
  • NA
    National Asian American United Inc
    one grant, 2019 · $90k · revenue -99% · 58% of their budget
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
Asian American Advocacy Alliance
Community Improvement
2
Alliance for Asian American Justice Inc

Coordinate pro bono legal aid for victims of anti-Asian violence.

Civil Rights
3
Api Coalition

T o create synergy for uniting Asian Pacific American leaders and API organizations and to promote APIA empowerment and civic engagement

Civil Rights
4
Coalition of Asian American Leaders

The Coalition of Asian American Leaders (CAAL) is a network organization of Asian Minnesotan leaders harnessing our collective power to improve the lives of community.

Arts & Culture
5
Chinese for Affirmative Action

CAA is a community-based civil rights organization that conducts community service, policy advocacy, and movement building activities.

Civil Rights
6
Asian AmericansPacific Islanders in Philanthropy Inc

AAPIP expands and mobilizes resources for AAPI communities to build a more just and equitable society.

Philanthropy
7
Asian Pacific Islander Cultural Center

The center promotes the artistic and organizational growth of the San Francisco Bay Areas Asian Pacific arts community by organizing and presenting the annual United States of Asian America Festival

Arts & Culture
8
Asian Pacific American Legal

To advance the legal and civil rights of Asian Pacific Americans through direct services, education and advocacy.

Crime & Legal
9
Pacific Asian American Women Bay Area Coalition

Represent interests of Asian-Pacific Island Women.

—
10
Center for Asian Americans United for Self-Empowerment Inc

Center for Asian Americans United for Self Empowerment CAUSE is a 501c3 nonprofit, nonpartisan, community-based organization with a mission to advance the political and civic empowerment of the Asian Pacific American APA community through…

Civil Rights
11
Asian Inc

The core mission of ASIAN, Inc. is the empowerment of the Asian American Community to achieve social equality by reducing dependency to create and expand access to opportunities in the areas of business development, housing and education.…

Community Improvement
12
Asians for Collective Action

Asians for Collective Action (ACA) harnesses the strenghts of Asians and Asian Americans to drive systemic change to create a just, healthy, and thriving community for all.

Public Benefit
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The 1990 Institute; the most unlike its peers is Central California Bleeding Disorders Foundation. 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

9 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. 9 of the 25 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
4/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Civic Leadership Academy: $330,000 · OtherCivic Leadership AcademyIndividual grant recipient: $290,429 · OtherIndividual grant recipientAAUC: $181,456 · OtherAAUCCA Asian Pacific Chamber: $62,500 · OtherCA Asian Pacific ChamberAPALI: $37,500 · Other+13 more: $208,750 · Other+13 moreAsian Pacific Islander American Public Affairs - Community Education Foundation: $186,500 · Civil RightsAsian Pacific Islander A…Asian & Pacific Islander American Vote: $100,000 · Civil RightsAsian & Pacific Islander…National Asian American United Inc: $90,000 · Civil RightsNational Asian American …NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FILIPINO AMERICAN ASSOC: $23,000 · Civil RightsNATIONAL FEDERATION OF F…CENTRAL CALIFORNIA BLEEDING DISORDERS FOUNDATION: $355,000 · HealthCENTRAL CALIFORNIA BL…THE 1990 INSTITUTE: $12,500 · InternationalSILICON VALLEY COMMUNITY MEDIA: $7,500 · Arts & Culture
Other$1,110,635Civil Rights$399,500Health$355,000International$12,500Arts & Culture$7,500

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCENTRAL CALIFORNIA BLEEDING DISORDERS FOUNDATION: $355,000 over 3y, 70% of budgetAsian Pacific Islander American Public Affairs - Community Education Foundation: $186,500 over 2y, 14% of budgetAsian & Pacific Islander American Vote: $100,000 over 1y, 28% of budgetNational Asian American United Inc: $90,000 over 1y, 58% of budgetNATIONAL FEDERATION OF FILIPINO AMERICAN ASSOC: $23,000 over 1y, 9.0% of budgetTHE 1990 INSTITUTE: $12,500 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetSANTA CLARA COUNTY ASIAN LAW ALLIANCE: $11,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetUNITED CHINESE AMERICANS: $8,000 over 1y, 2.6% 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 CENTRAL CALIFORNIA BLEEDING DISORDERS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Asian Pacific Islander American Public Affairs - Community Education Foundation ↗
  • Who funds Asian & Pacific Islander American Vote ↗
  • Who funds National Asian American United Inc ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FILIPINO AMERICAN ASSOC ↗
  • Who funds THE 1990 INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds SANTA CLARA COUNTY ASIAN LAW ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds UNITED CHINESE AMERICANS ↗
  • Who funds SILICON VALLEY COMMUNITY MEDIA ↗

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.

American Online Giving Foundation IncDE5.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Civic Leadership USA Clusa funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Civic Leadership USA Clusa. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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 Civic Leadership USA Clusa?

    Find your warmest path to Civic Leadership USA Clusa 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 25 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record but names no grant recipient (grants abroad are filed by region only, and grants under $5,000 are not itemized), so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Civic Leadership USA Clusa’s filings →

    More from the funding graph