Skip to content

· 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.

$41k
Granted FY2025still arriving
44
Grants FY2025still arriving
12
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Education$71kHealth$41kInternational$36kHuman Services$35kHousing & Shelter$33kCrime & Legal$31kFood & Nutrition$24kCivil Rights$15kOther$0
02FY2025 · 44 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$750
Median grant
12
States reached
$1.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
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
SCID PDA SEATTLE CHINATOWN INTL DI$1,500
SAFE PASSAGE PROJECT$1,500
PALESTINE CHILDREN RELIEF FUND$1,500
LIFEMOVES$1,400
SECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK$1,200
WOMEN IN NEED WIN$1,015
THE ROTARY FOUNDATION$1,000
SHELTERBOX VIA GIVEBUTTER$1,000
DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS$1,000
NETWORK FOR GOOD FBO DOROTHY DAY HO$1,000
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 (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. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%JUNGLE KEEPERS: $1k → 9%CHARITY NAVIGATOR: $100 → 7%CHARITY NAVIGATOR: $100 → 7%CHARITY NAVIGATOR: $100 → 7%CHARITY NAVIGATOR: $100 → 7%CHARITY NAVIGATOR: $100 → 7%CHARITY NAVIGATOR: $100 → 7%CHARITY NAVIGATOR: $50 → 7%CHARITY NAVIGATOR: $50 → 7%CHARITY NAVIGATOR: $50 → 7%WOMEN IN NEED WIN: $1k → 9%WOMEN IN NEED WIN: $1k → 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

VT
NH
WA
IL
MI
NY
MA
PA
NJ
CT
CA
CO
NE
VA
MD
TN
DC
HI
GA
TX
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.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$303k · 55 repeat orgs$38k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +40% since the first grant, against +40% for those 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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

55
28

Total granted

$303k
$25k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+40%
+40%

Still filing today

51%
43%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 68% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13k 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
EducationCrime & LegalHealthHuman ServicesInternationalYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • RE
    RAVENSWOOD EDUCATION FOUNDATION
    8× · 2017–2024 · $33k · revenue +212%
  • L
    LIFEMOVES
    9× · 2017–2025 · $20k · revenue +186%
  • SF
    St Francis Center
    6× · 2017–2022 · $15k · revenue +58%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2020 · $5k
  • H
    H2OPENDOORS
    one grant, 2019 · $4k
  • BF
    BRIGHT FUNDS
    one grant, 2017 · $2k
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
Kqed Inc

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;…

Arts & Culture
2
Public Advocates Inc

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,…

—
3
Food Forward Inc

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.

Food & Nutrition
4
California Dental Association Foundation

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.

Science & Tech
5
The Uc Davis Foundation

The mission of the uc davis foundation is to secure, steward and manage private gifts for uc davis.

Education
6
Golden Gate University

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…

Education
7
The San Diego Foundation

The san diego foundation inspires enduring philanthropy and enables community solutions to improve the quality of life in our region.

Philanthropy
8
California Dental Association

The california dental association is committed to the success of our members in service to their patients and the public.

Community Improvement
9
Dominican University of California

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.

Education
10
People Inc

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,…

Human Services
11
Boston Architectural College

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

—
12
Community Foundation Santa Cruz County

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.

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Dreamorg; 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.
04the grantee network

52 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. 52 of the 97 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)
15
Early backer (in before they grew)
50/52
Grantees still filing
38/52
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LIFEMOVES: $20,400 · OtherLIFEMOVESSt Francis Center: $14,500 · OtherSt Francis CenterSECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK: $11,400 · OtherTHE PENINSULA BRIDGE PROGRAM: $9,750 · OtherRAVENSWOOD CLASSROOM PARTNERS: $9,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $8,650 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD: $8,100 · Other+67 more: $144,206 · Other+67 moreRAVENSWOOD EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $33,200 · EducationRAVENSWOOD E…Trustees of Tufts College: $2,000 · EducationWESLEYAN UNIVERSITY: $2,000 · Education+2 more: $1,211 · EducationGEORGIA INNOCENCE PROJECT INC: $14,400 · Crime & LegalGEORGIA I…CASA of San Mateo County: $5,500 · Crime & LegalCASA of S…THE BAIL PROJECT INC: $5,000 · Crime & LegalTHE BAIL …The Petey Greene Program Inc: $4,500 · Crime & LegalThe Petey…SAFE PASSAGE PROJECT CORPORATION: $1,500 · Crime & LegalTHE ROTARY FOUNDATION OF ROTARY INTERNATIONAL: $12,021 · InternationalTHE ROTAR…MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $9,750 · InternationalMEDECINS …KIVA MICROFUNDS: $4,500 · InternationalKIVA MICR…THE WATER PROJECT INC: $2,750 · InternationalTHE WATER…PALESTINE CHILDREN'S RELIEF FUND: $1,500 · InternationalBACK ON MY FEET: $8,141 · Human ServicesWomen in Need: $2,030 · Human ServicesJUNGLEKEEPERS INC: $1,000 · Human ServicesCharity Navigator: $750 · Human ServicesJOBTRAIN INC: $10,200 · EmploymentTHE DREAM PROGRAM INC: $6,874 · Youth DevelopmentDorothy Day House: $1,550 · Youth DevelopmentGlobal Health Connections Inc: $515 · Youth Development
Other$226,506Education$38,411Crime & Legal$30,900International$30,521Human Services$11,921Employment$10,200Youth Development$8,939

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 budgetRAVENSWOOD EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $33,200 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetLIFEMOVES: $20,400 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetSt Francis Center: $14,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetGEORGIA INNOCENCE PROJECT INC: $14,400 over 9y, 0.6% of budgetTHE ROTARY FOUNDATION OF ROTARY INTERNATIONAL: $12,021 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetJOBTRAIN INC: $10,200 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetTHE PENINSULA BRIDGE PROGRAM: $9,750 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $9,750 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetRAVENSWOOD CLASSROOM PARTNERS: $9,500 over 4y, 1.0% of budgetBACK ON MY FEET: $8,141 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Michigan: $7,000 over 8y, 0.5% of budgetFOOD BANK FOR MONTEREY COUNTY: $7,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE DREAM PROGRAM INC: $6,874 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetIHS THE INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN SERVICES INC: $6,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCASA of San Mateo County: $5,500 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetTHE BAIL PROJECT INC: $5,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetALOHA HARVEST: $5,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetThe Bridge Restoration Ministry: $4,500 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetKIVA MICROFUNDS: $4,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetThe Petey Greene Program Inc: $4,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC: $4,200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMILLS COLLEGE: $3,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE WATER PROJECT INC: $2,750 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWomen in Need: $2,030 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTrustees of Tufts College: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWESLEYAN UNIVERSITY: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCHILD AND FAMILY SERVICE: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetROTARY CLUB OF MENLO PARK FOUNDATION: $1,700 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $1,675 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetDorothy Day House: $1,550 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetREDWOOD EMPIRE FOOD BANK: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPENINSULA HUMANE SOCIETY & SPCA: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCharity Navigator: $750 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetBREAST CANCER ASSISTANCE GROUP: $600 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetGlobal Health Connections Inc: $515 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetNATIONAL DAY LABORER ORGANIZING NETWORK: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHAWAII SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCANDID: $300 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetPAN-MASSACHUSETTS CHALLENGE INC: $256 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDREAMORG: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRodman For Kids Inc: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR A COLLEGE EDUCATION: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFIRST RESPONDERS FOUNDATION: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBROADWAY CARESEQUITY FIGHTS AIDS INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetASIAN ART MUSEUM FOUNDATION OF SAN FRANCISCO: $50 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.

  • 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 THE BAIL PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds ALOHA HARVEST ↗
  • Who funds The Bridge Restoration Ministry ↗
  • Who funds KIVA MICROFUNDS ↗
  • Who funds The Petey Greene Program Inc ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds MILLS COLLEGE ↗

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.

Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA19.1× affinity11 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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 J Tsiang Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from David J Tsiang 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%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 13%
  • 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
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
13report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
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 97 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 J Tsiang’s filings →

More from the funding graph