Skip to content
Dsds Lew Family Foundation Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

Dsds Lew Family Foundation Inc

$79k
Granted FY2021
5
Grants FY2021
2
States reached
$42k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2021.

Education$47kArts & Culture$23kCommunity Improvement$19kAnimals$18kPhilanthropy$500Human Services$500Health$100
02FY2021 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2021

  • Under $10k2 grants · $1k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $78k
$18,016
Median grant
2
States reached
$4k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UCSD FOUNDATION$41,717
HELEN WOODWARD ANIMAL CENTER$18,017
PACIFIC ARTS MOVEMENT$18,016
CHINESE BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION INC$500
BOWDOIN COLLEGE$500
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 (FY17–20, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%UNION OF PAN ASIAN COMMUNITIES: $10k → 11%UNION OF PAN ASIAN COMMUNITIES: $2k → 11%UNION OF PAN ASIAN COMMUNITIES: $2k → 11%UNION OF PAN ASIAN COMMUNITIES: $500 → 11%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.

65%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$71k · 5 repeat orgs$38k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +94% since the first grant, against -1% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2021, 4 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
2

Total granted

$71k
$600

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+94%
-1%

Still filing today

80%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2021, 53% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $37k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21
Arts & CultureEducationPhilanthropyAnimalsHuman 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

  • US
    UC SAN DIEGO FOUNDATION
    2× · 2019–2021 · $47k · revenue +106%
  • UO
    UNION OF PAN ASIAN COMMUNITIES
    4× · 2017–2020 · $15k · revenue +94%
  • AB
    ASIAN BUSINESS ASSOCIATION SAN DIEGO
    2× · 2017–2018 · $5k · revenue +297%

Funded once

  • TS
    THE SHILLMAN FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2019 · $500 · revenue -1%
  • AA
    Alzheimer Association
    one grant, 2020 · $100
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
Uc Chinese Alumni Foundation
—
2
San Diego Chinese Historical Society and Museum

Preservation of the history and heritage of Chinese-Americans in San Diego and the education of people in Chinese-American history. Special exhibits & lectures occur in addition to permanent exhibits.

Arts & Culture
3
Asian American Advocacy Alliance
Community Improvement
4
Center for Advanced China Research
—
5
Japantown Cultural Society
Education
6
Shanghai Jiao Tong University Foundation of America (Sjtufa)
Education
7
San Francisco Guzheng Music Society
Arts & Culture
8
California Institute of Contemporary Art
—
9
San Diego Falun Dafa Association

The mission is to promote and advertise public awareness of chinese culture by perferming shen yun shows. in addition, falun dafa are taught free of charge.

Human Services
10
Taiwanese-American Foundation of San Diego

To engage in chratable educational and community activities that promote culture and tradition in the community, and promote the health and social well-being of the communities.

Arts & Culture
11
The Asia Society

The society is an international nonprofit, nonpartisan organization which connects people and institutions in asia and the world to build understanding, address challenges and maximize opportunities.

International
12
San Diego Double Ten Committee
Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Uc San Diego Foundation; the most unlike its peers is The Shillman Foundation. 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 11 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/9
Grantees still filing
5/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UC SAN DIEGO FOUNDATION: $46,717 · EducationUC SAN DIEGO FOUNDATION+1 more: $500 · EducationPACIFIC ARTS MOVEMENT: $18,016 · Arts & CulturePACIFIC ARTS MOVEMENTSAN DIEGO-YANTAI FRIENDSHIP SOCIETY: $4,050 · Arts & CultureSAN DIEGO-YANTAI FRIEND…CHINESE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA: $850 · Arts & CultureHELEN WOODWARD ANIMAL CENTER: $18,017 · AnimalsHELEN WOODWARD ANI…UNION OF PAN ASIAN COMMUNITIES: $14,700 · Human ServicesUNION OF PAN AS…ASIAN BUSINESS ASSOCIATION SAN DIEGO: $4,700 · OtherCHINESE BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION INC: $500 · Other+1 more: $100 · OtherTHE SHILLMAN FOUNDATION: $500 · Philanthropy
Education$47,217Arts & Culture$22,916Animals$18,017Human Services$14,700Other$5,300Philanthropy$500

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUC SAN DIEGO FOUNDATION: $46,717 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHELEN WOODWARD ANIMAL CENTER: $18,017 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPACIFIC ARTS MOVEMENT: $18,016 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetUNION OF PAN ASIAN COMMUNITIES: $14,700 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetASIAN BUSINESS ASSOCIATION SAN DIEGO: $4,700 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetSAN DIEGO-YANTAI FRIENDSHIP SOCIETY: $4,050 over 3y, 27% of budgetCHINESE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA: $850 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE SHILLMAN FOUNDATION: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBowdoin College: $500 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Dsds Lew Family Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Dsds Lew Family Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%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
    0get no government money at all
    2report 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Dsds Lew Family Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Dsds Lew Family 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 11 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 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record but names no grant recipient in the published copy, so the figures above are from FY2021, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Dsds Lew Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home