Skip to content

· Private foundation

David and June Kim Foundation Inc

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.

$5k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$4k
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, FY2018 to 2025.

Religion$121kEducation$33kArts & Culture$2kScience & Tech$2kRecreation & Sports$1kPublic Safety & Disaster$1kMembership Benefit$1kHealth$610Other$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$39k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
KOREAN PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF ORLANDO$4,300
KSEA FL CHAPTER INC$1,000
THE FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH OF ORLANDO INC$100
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 (FY21–21, $500) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%ASIAN AMERICANS ADVANCING JUSTICE - ATLANTA: $500 → 9%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

NY
MA
NJ
CA
VA
TN
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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$148k · 4 repeat orgs$15k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +78% since the first grant, against +26% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
11

Total granted

$148k
$14k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+78%
+26%

Still filing today

50%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationArts & CultureScience & TechHealthReligionHuman ServicesOther
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

  • IC
    IN2 CHURCH
    5× · 2018–2024 · $87k
  • PI
    PRATT INSTITUTE
    6× · 2019–2024 · $32k · revenue +23%
  • KP
    KOREAN PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF ORLANDO INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $28k

Funded once

  • P
    PIONEERS
    one grant, 2020 · $4k
  • TS
    TIGER STRIKES ASTEROID INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $2k · revenue +74%
  • KS
    KOREAN-AMERICAN SCIENTISTS & ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $1k · revenue +127%
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
American Association for the Advancement of Science

Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…

Science & Tech
2
Manhattanville University

To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.

Education
3
Boston Architectural College

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

—
4
Shanghai Jiao Tong University Foundation of America (Sjtufa)
Education
5
University of Miami

See Form 990, Part I, Line 1, Description of Organization Mission.

Education
6
The Trustees of Princeton University

Research, education and general - princeton university is a private not-for-profit, non-sectarian institution of higher learning with approximately 5,700 undergraduate and 3,300 graduate students. 2,500 students graduated in the 2024-2025…

Education
7
The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science & Art

See schedule ovision: the cooper union for the advancement of science and art is dedicated to peter cooper's radical commitment to diversity and his founding vision that fair access to an inspiring free education and forums for courageous…

Education
8
American Association of State Colleges and Universities

Aascu is a washington, d.c. based higher education association that represents the sector of over 500 regional public colleges, universities, and systems whose members share a learning and teaching centered culture, a commitment to…

Education
9
Trustees of Boston University

Organization's mission: boston university is an international, comprehensive, private research university, committed to educating students to be reflective, resourceful individuals ready to live, adapt, and lead in an interconnected world.…

—
10
Institute for Advanced Study - Louis Bamberger & Mrs Felix Fuld Foundation

The institute for advanced study (the institute) is one of the world's leading centers for theoretical research and intellectual inquiry. see schedule o.

Science & Tech
11
Aacsb International - the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business

Aacsb international provides quality assurance of business school programs, the latest in business education intelligence, thought leadership, and learning and development services.

Education
12
William Marsh Rice University

As a leading research university with a distinctive commitment to undergraduate education, Rice University aspires to path breaking research, unsurpassed teaching, and contributions to the betterment of our world. It seeks to fulfill this…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Christian Union Inc; the most unlike its peers is Tiger Strikes Asteroid Inc. 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 17 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
8/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

IN2 CHURCH: $86,522 · OtherIN2 CHURCHKOREAN PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF ORLANDO INC: $28,400 · OtherKOREAN PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF ORLANDO INC+7 more: $9,100 · Other+7 morePRATT INSTITUTE: $32,000 · EducationPRATT INSTITUTE+1 more: $1,000 · EducationTIGER STRIKES ASTEROID INC: $2,000 · Arts & CultureKOREAN-AMERICAN SCIENTISTS & ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION INC: $1,000 · Science & TechCHRISTIAN UNION INC: $1,000 · ReligionST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $610 · HealthASIAN AMERICANS ADVANCING JUSTICE ATLANTA INC: $500 · Human ServicesGOFUNDMEORG: $110 · Philanthropy
Other$124,022Education$33,000Arts & Culture$2,000Science & Tech$1,000Religion$1,000Health$610Human Services$500Philanthropy$110

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 budgetPRATT INSTITUTE: $32,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetTIGER STRIKES ASTEROID INC: $2,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetKOREAN-AMERICAN SCIENTISTS & ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPENSACOLA STATE COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHRISTIAN UNION INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGordon-Conwell Theological Seminary Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $610 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetASIAN AMERICANS ADVANCING JUSTICE ATLANTA INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGOFUNDMEORG: $110 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.

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.

National Philanthropic TrustPA8.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 David and June Kim Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from David and June Kim Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    3get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 David and June Kim Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to David and June Kim Foundation Inc 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 17 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 David and June Kim’s filings →

    More from the funding graph