Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Committee of 100 Inc

To provide leadership and act as a constructive force in the dual mission of: 1) promoting the full participation of chinese americans in american society and acting as a public policy resource for the chinese american community, and 2) promoting constructive dialogue and relationships between the peoples and leaders of the united states…

$40k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$40k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20182024.

Public Benefit$600kScience & Tech$200kArts & Culture$60kInternational$50kCommunity Improvement$40k
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$40,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$13M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NATIONAL CENTER FOR APEC$40,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY18–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 38% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%RICHARD NIXON FOUNDATION: $500k → 10%GIVE2ASIA: $50k → 10%CENTER FOR ASIAN AMERICAN MEDIA: $60k → 10%US ASSOCIATION OF FORMER MEMBERS OF CONGRESS: $25k → 14%NATIONAL CENTER FOR APEC: $40k → 9%THE US ASSOCIATION OF FORMER MEMBERS OF CONGRESS: $25k → 14%THE US ASSOCIATION OF FORMER MEMBERS OF CONGRESS: $25k → 14%THE US ASSOCIATION OF FORMER MEMBERS OF CONGRESS: $25k → 14%NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING (NAE): $200k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

03Your field

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.

1
Humc Cardiovascular Partners Pc

The organization provides high quality medical care to the community that it serves and specifically provides cardiology & related professional medical services in conjunction with hmh hospitals corp.

Health
2
Hmh Hospitals Corporation

The organization is committed to providing the full spectrum of life-enhancing care and services to create and sustain healthy, vibrant communities. please refer to schedule h, part vi, question 5 for the organization's community benefit…

Health
3
Humc Medical Observation Pa

To serve as the physician services component of a tax-exempt healthcare delivery network and to thereby promote, support & further the charitable purposes, programs & services of hmh hospitals corp.

4
Banner -University Medical Group

Assist banner health complete its mission to make health care easier so life can be better by providing integrated & coordinated care & population health management.

Health
5
Pasadena Hospital Association Ltd

Huntington Health stands for community. We stand for compassion. But more than anything, Huntington stands for health. Providing world-class health care is our specialty, and it's what we've been doing for the San Gabriel Valley since…

Health
6
Central Maine Medical Center

To provide exceptional healthcare services in a safe and trustfulenvironment through the expertise, commitment and compassion of ourfamily of caregivers.

Health
7
Memorial Hermann Medical Group

Memorial hermann health system is a nonprofit, values-driven, community-owned health system dedicated to improving health. our vision is to create healthier communities, now and for generations to come. our values are community,…

Health
8
University Hospital & Clinics Inc

The organization provides medical care to improve, maintain, and restore the health of the people in the communities we serve.

Health
9
Lenox Hill Hospital Medical Pc

Lenox hill hospital medical, pc is part of northwell health ("northwell"), which strives to improve the health of the communities it serves and is committed to providing the highest quality clinical care; educating the current and future…

Health
10
Community Medical Centers Inc

The organization provides primary medical, behavior health, and dental care to the population of san joaquin, and solano counties without regard to patients' ability to pay.

Health
11
Mercy Medical Center

Like the Sisters of Mercy before us, we witness God's healing love for all people by providing excellent clinical services within a community of compassionate care. As an independent Catholic hospital, we pledge to enhance the health of…

Health
12
CalvertHealth Medical Center Inc

Calverthealth medical center provides quality inpatient and ambulatory health care to the people of southern maryland that is accessible, cost-effective and compassionate. chmc works in partnership with the community to improve the health…

Health

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Miami Beach Community Health Center Inc and the most unlike its peers is Kahal Foundation Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyPolicy Research and AdvocacyHealth Access Advocacy and …Community FoundationsFaith-Based Liberal Arts Co…Community College Foundatio…
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 45 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number24%0%<5yr15%4%5–10yr20%7%10–20yr17%19%20–35yr11%35%35–55yr13%36%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value24%0%<5yr15%0%5–10yr20%0%10–20yr17%10%20–35yr11%80%35–55yr13%11%55yr+

The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close 2% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
2%2/101
the rest of the field
14%
26,003/186,877

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

04the grantee network

91 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2024.

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 20172024, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
86/91
Grantees still filing
78/91
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

THE RICHARD NIXON FOUNDATION — $500,000 · OtherTHE RICHARD NIXON FOUNDATIONNATIONAL CENTER FOR APEC — $40,000 · OtherNATIONAL CENTER FOR APECNATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING FUND — $200,000 · Science & TechNATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENG…FORMER MEMBERS OF CONGRESS — $100,000 · Public BenefitFORMER MEMB…Center for Asian American Media — $60,000 · Arts & CultureGIVE2ASIA — $50,000 · International
Other$540,000Science & Tech$200,000Public Benefit$100,000Arts & Culture$60,000International$50,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetTHE RICHARD NIXON FOUNDATION — $500,000 over 1y, 7.3% of budgetNATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING FUND — $200,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetFORMER MEMBERS OF CONGRESS — $100,000 over 4y, 1.1% of budgetCenter for Asian American Media — $60,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetGIVE2ASIA — $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL CENTER FOR APEC — $40,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budget
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.

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.

Direct ReliefCA44.3× affinity25 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Direct Relief · Reach Out and Read Inc · American Cancer Society Inc · Delta Dental Community Care Foundation · Americares Foundation Inc · California Physicians' Service Fdn Dba Blue Shield of California Fdn · California Healthcare Foundation · Essential Access Health · California Primary Care Association · American Heart Association Inc · Public Health Institute · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals

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 Committee of 100 Inc 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.

2024
2021222324
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your 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
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY2024

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 6 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 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

    More from the funding graph