· Private foundation
David J Tsiang 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 |
|---|---|
| UCSF - PKD CENTER | $5,000 |
| GEORGIA INNOCENCE PROJECT | $2,500 |
| ACLU FOUNDATION | $2,100 |
| ALL STUDENTS MATTER AKA RAVENSWOOD | $2,060 |
| IHS - INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN SERVICES | $2,000 |
| SAFE PASSAGE PROJECT | $1,500 |
| SCID PDA SEATTLE CHINATOWN INTL DI | $1,500 |
| PALESTINE CHILDREN RELIEF FUND | $1,500 |
| LIFEMOVES | $1,400 |
| SECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK | $1,200 |
| WOMEN IN NEED WIN | $1,015 |
| DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS | $1,000 |
| ALOHA HARVEST | $1,000 |
| THE ROTARY FOUNDATION | $1,000 |
| CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICE | $1,000 |
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 (FY17–25, $4k) 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. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
Which US states your grants reach
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 +40% since the first grant, against +40% for the ones you funded once.
55 repeat relationships — 30 still active in FY2025, 25 since wound down; 12 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, 68% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13k 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
- RERAVENSWOOD EDUCATION FOUNDATION8× · 2017–2024 · $33k · revenue +212%
- LLIFEMOVES9× · 2017–2025 · $20k · revenue +186%
- SFSt Francis Center6× · 2017–2022 · $15k · revenue +58%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2020 · $5k
- HH2OPENDOORSone grant, 2019 · $4k
- BFBRIGHT FUNDSone 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.
See schedule okqed serves the people of northern california with a community-supported alternative to commercial media, providing the knowledge needed to make informed decisions; convening community dialogue; bringing the arts to everyone;…
For more than five decades, public advocates has challenged the systemic causes of poverty and racial discrimination by strengthening community voices in public policy and achieving tangible legal victories advancing education, housing,…
Food forward fights hunger and prevents food waste by rescuing fresh surplus produce, connecting this abundance with people experiencing food insecurity, and inspiring others to do the same.
The foundation's mission is to improve the oral health of all californians by supporting the dental profession and its efforts to meet community needs.
The mission of the uc davis foundation is to secure, steward and manage private gifts for uc davis.
Golden gate university prepares individuals to lead and serve by providing high quality, practice-based educational programs in law, taxation, business and related professions - as a nonprofit institution - in an innovative and challenging…
The san diego foundation inspires enduring philanthropy and enables community solutions to improve the quality of life in our region.
The california dental association is committed to the success of our members in service to their patients and the public.
Our institutional mission is to educate and prepare students to be ethical leaders and socially responsible global citizens who incorporate the dominican values of study, reflection, community and service into their lives.
People inc. provides health and human services that enrich lives and communities through innovation and supportive services. with a goal to help people achieve greater independence and quality of life, people inc. provides day,…
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
To promote philanthropy to make santa cruz county a better place to live, now and in the future.we bring together people, ideas, and resources to inspire philanthropy and accomplish great things.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Dreamorg and the most unlike its peers is University of Michigan. 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.
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 31 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
52 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. 52 of the 97 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 RAVENSWOOD EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LIFEMOVES ↗
- Who funds St Francis Center ↗
- Who funds GEORGIA INNOCENCE PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds THE ROTARY FOUNDATION OF ROTARY INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds JOBTRAIN INC ↗
- Who funds THE PENINSULA BRIDGE PROGRAM ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds RAVENSWOOD CLASSROOM PARTNERS ↗
- Who funds BACK ON MY FEET ↗
- Who funds University of Michigan ↗
- Who funds FOOD BANK FOR MONTEREY COUNTY ↗
- Who funds THE DREAM PROGRAM INC ↗
- Who funds IHS THE INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds CASA of San Mateo County ↗
- Who funds ALOHA HARVEST ↗
- Who funds THE BAIL PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds The Bridge Restoration Ministry ↗
- Who funds The Petey Greene Program Inc ↗
- Who funds KIVA MICROFUNDS ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds MILLS COLLEGE ↗
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: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The Palo Alto Community Fund · Central Pacific Bank Foundation · Philanthropic Ventures Foundation · Bohannon Foundation · The Cades Foundation · First Hawaiian Bank Foundation · J Watumull Fund · Atkinson Foundation · Aloha United Way Inc · Atherton Family Foundation · The San Francisco 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 David J Tsiang 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.
- The Dream Program Inc — 100% of income from government
- The Petey Greene Program Inc — 29% of income from government
- Trustees of Tufts College — 13% of income from government
- Wesleyan University — 1% of income from government
- Pan-Massachusetts Challenge Inc — 0% of income from government
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.