Skip to content

· Private foundation

David and Mary Chow Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$78k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$73k
Largest
01What it funds
0184% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Religion$252kEducation$25kArts & Culture$13kHealth$9kRecreation & Sports$8kInternational$5kScience & Tech$1kHuman Services$1kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $5k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $73k
$1,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$825k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Seventh-Day Adventist Church 52-064$72,650
AAPCA 46-0667457$3,000
Ameri Asian Photogra SocEIN84-45015$1,000
Loma Linda Academy 95-1831069$1,000
NLASAAA 95-4773487$200
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 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 37% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%St Vincent - Ferrer School: $5k → 10%Biological Research Institute: $1k → 11%La Sierra University 33-0413730: $1k → 11%Loma Linda Academy 95-1831069: $1k → 14%Hamilton-Madison House: $5k → 17%Photographic Society of America: $5k → 16%Coral Triangle - Bali: $1k → 7%SE Asia Foundation EIN 46-2929184: $2k → 9%Seventh-Day Adventist Church 52-064: $73k → 8%Restore A Child Inc: $3k → 11%AAPCA 46-0667457: $3k → 11%The Siksha Foundation 45-1271224: $3k → 14%Indonesian Bethel Church Be 95-4650: $1k → 14%Photographic Society of America: $1k → 16%Genral Conferences of Seventh Day: $50k → 8%The Siksha Foundation 45-1271224: $1k → 14%San Gabriel ACAD: $12k → 14%Photographic Society of America: $1k → 16%Seventh-Day Adventist Church 52-064: $37k → 8%Alumni Association of Pasay City Ac: $5k → 14%Ameri Asian Photogra SocEIN84-45015: $4k → 14%Photographic Society of America: $1k → 16%Seventh-Day Adventist Church 52-064: $30k → 8%Alumni Association of Pasay City Ac: $3k → 14%San Gabriel ACAD: $5k → 14%Genral Conferences of Seventh Day: $25k → 8%Redlands Adventist Academy 45-04769: $2k → 14%Ameri Asian Photogra SocEIN84-45015: $3k → 14%Seventh-Day Adventist Church: $25k → 8%Redlands Adventist Academy 45-04769: $1k → 14%San Gabriel ACAD: $3k → 14%Seventh-Day Adventist Church 52-064: $14k → 8%Ameri Asian Photogra SocEIN84-45015: $1k → 14%San Gabriel ACAD: $3k → 14%FAASBC- Filipino American A 87-1722: $1k → 14%Ameri Asian Photogra SocEIN84-45015: $1k → 14%San Gabriel ACAD: $2k → 14%Ameri Asian Photogra SocEIN84-45015: $1k → 14%San Gabriel ACAD: $1k → 14%West Covina Hills SchoolEIN 95-6005: $1k → 14%Cambodia Adventist Int'l 95-4743276: $1k → 14%Thai Church of Glorious God 95-4822: $25k → 14%Thai Church of Glorious God 95-4822: $23k → 14%Thai Church of Glorious God 95-4822: $16k → 14%Thai Church of Glorious God 95-4822: $3k → 14%Thai Church of Glorious God 95-4822: $2k → 14%The Siksha Foundation 45-1271224: $5k → 14%The Siksha Foundation 45-1271224: $4k → 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.
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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$365k · 10 repeat orgs$54k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +15% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
17

Total granted

$365k
$49k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+15%
0%

Still filing today

20%
12%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4k 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
Arts & CultureEducationPhilanthropyHealthOther
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

  • SA
    Seventh-Day Adventist Church 52-064
    4× · 2022–2025 · $153k
  • GC
    Genral Conferences of Seventh Day
    2× · 2018–2019 · $75k
  • TC
    Thai Church of Glorious God 95-4822
    5× · 2017–2024 · $69k

Funded once

  • SA
    Seventh-Day Adventist Church
    one grant, 2021 · $25k
  • HH
    HAMILTON-MADISON HOUSE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue +47%
  • SV
    St Vincent - Ferrer School
    one grant, 2017 · $5k
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
04the grantee network

5 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. 5 of the 30 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
4/5
Grantees still filing
2/5
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Seventh-Day Adventist Church 52-064: $153,400 · OtherSeventh-Day Adventist Church 52-064Genral Conferences of Seventh Day: $75,000 · OtherGenral Conferences of Seventh DayThai Church of Glorious God 95-4822: $68,500 · OtherThai Church of Glorious God 95-4822Individual grant recipient: $26,440 · OtherIndividual grant recipientSeventh-Day Adventist Church: $25,000 · OtherSeventh-Day Adventist Church+20 more: $52,876 · Other+20 morePHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY OF AMERICA: $8,000 · Arts & CultureHAMILTON-MADISON HOUSE INC: $5,000 · Arts & CultureRESTORE A CHILD INC: $2,710 · PhilanthropyBARTON HOUSE PLAYSCHOOL: $1,040 · EducationTHE BIOLOGICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $1,000 · Health
Other$401,216Arts & Culture$13,000Philanthropy$2,710Education$1,040Health$1,000

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 budgetPHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY OF AMERICA: $8,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetHAMILTON-MADISON HOUSE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRESTORE A CHILD INC: $2,710 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetBARTON HOUSE PLAYSCHOOL: $1,040 over 2y, 0.1% 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 PHOTOGRAPHIC SOCIETY OF AMERICA ↗
  • Who funds HAMILTON-MADISON HOUSE INC ↗
  • Who funds RESTORE A CHILD INC ↗
  • Who funds BARTON HOUSE PLAYSCHOOL ↗
  • Who funds THE BIOLOGICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE ↗

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile FoundationWA2.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Mary Chow Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from David and Mary Chow Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get 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 · 0–15%
    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 30 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 Mary Chow’s filings →

    More from the funding graph