Skip to content
Fmck Lee Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Fmck Lee Foundation

Its FY2026 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$68k
Granted FY2026still arriving
8
Grants FY2026still arriving
4
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2025.

International$141kHealth$34kReligion$20kEducation$19kPublic Safety & Disaster$8kFood & Nutrition$5kHuman Services$1k
02FY2026 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2026

  • Under $10k2 grants · $8k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $60k
$10,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$486k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PALESTINE CHILDREN'S RELIEF FUND$10,000
NEW HOPE CHINESE CANCER CARE FOUNDATION$10,000
WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN$10,000
DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS$10,000
UNICEF USA$10,000
CARE$10,000
CALTECH$5,000
SAN JOSE CHINESE CATHOLIC MISSION$2,500
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–26) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 75% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%SAN JOSE CHINESE CATHOLIC MISSION (SJCCM): $3k → 8%CALTECH: $5k → 14%DIRECT RELIEF: $10k → 14%UNICEF USA: $15k → 17%MERCEDARIAN MISSIONARIES: $1k → 8%CARE: $20k → 13%ALZHEIMER'S ASSOCIATION: $1k → 14%SAN JOSE CHINESE CATHOLIC MISSION: $3k → 8%CALTECH: $5k → 14%DIRECT RELIEF: $4k → 14%UNICEF USA: $10k → 17%CARE: $10k → 13%SAN JOSE CHINESE CATHOLIC MISSION: $3k → 8%CALTECH: $5k → 14%DIRECT RELIEF: $3k → 14%UNICEF USA: $5k → 17%CARE'S TURKEY - SYRIA EARTHQUAKES FUND: $8k → 13%SAN JOSE CHINESE CATHOLIC MISSION: $3k → 8%CALTECH: $5k → 14%UNICEF: $2k → 17%SAN JOSE CHINESE CATHOLIC MISSION: $3k → 8%CALTECH: $4k → 14%DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS: $20k → 17%SAN JOSE CHINESE CATHOLIC MISSION: $2k → 8%PALESTINE CHILDREN'S RELIEF FUND: $15k → 14%DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS: $20k → 17%NEW HOPE CHINESE CANCER CARE FOUNDATION: $10k → 8%PALESTINE CHILDREN'S RELIEF FUND: $10k → 14%DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS: $10k → 17%NEW HOPE CHINESE CANCER CARE FOUNDATION: $10k → 8%PALESTINE CHILDREN'S RELIEF FUND: $5k → 14%DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS: $10k → 17%NEW HOPE CHINESE CANCER CARE FOUNDATION: $10k → 8%DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS: $8k → 17%NEW HOPE CHINESE CANCER CARE FOUNDATION: $5k → 8%DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS: $4k → 17%NEW HOPE CHINESE CANCER CARE FOUNDATION: $5k → 8%NEW HOPE CHINESE CANCER CARE FOUNDATION: $3k → 8%SECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY: $5k → 8%CHONG HWA SAINT TAO YUAN: $4k → 8%CHONG HWA SAINT TAO YUAN: $3k → 8%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 22% of Fmck Lee Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 50% of the giving stays in CA; by stated purpose, 41%.

Fmck Lee Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 4.2% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
$267k · 9 repeat orgs$28k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +68% since the first grant, against +45% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2026, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2026 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
5

Total granted

$267k
$18k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+68%
+45%

Still filing today

78%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2026, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’22’23’24’25’26
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’22’23’24’25’26
InternationalEducationHealthFood & NutritionOther
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

  • MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC
    6× · 2019–2026 · $72k · revenue +79%
  • NH
    NEW HOPE CHINESE CANCER CARE FOUNDATION
    6× · 2017–2026 · $43k · revenue +68%
  • UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF
    4× · 2017–2026 · $32k · revenue +76%

Funded once

  • CT
    CARE'S TURKEY - SYRIA EARTHQUAKES FUND
    one grant, 2023 · $8k
  • SH
    SECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEYgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $5k · revenue +45%
  • SJ
    SAN JOSE CHINESE CATHOLIC MISSION
    one grant, 2022 · $3k
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
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
2
Federation of State Medical Boards of the United States Inc

The fsmb serves as the voice for state medical boards, supporting them through education, assessment, research and advocacy while providing services and initiatives that promote patient safety, quality health care and regulatory best…

Health
3
Food for the Hungry Inc

Food for the hungry is a christian humanitarian aid and global development organization that has designed, developed and delivered solutions for more than 50 years so that children, families and communities can flourish. (continued on…

International
4
Childfund Alliance

Childfund alliance is a global network of 11 child-focused development and humanitarian organizations working in more than 70 countries. we help nearly 30 million children and their families to overcome poverty and the underlying…

International
5
Council for Responsible Nutrition

To protect and advance a climate for our members to responsibly create and market science-based dietary supplements, functional food, and their ingredients, for better human health and nutrition.

—
6
Integrated Healthcare Association

Iha's mission is to bring the healthcare community together to solve industry-wide challenges that stand in the way of high-value care. as a non-profit industry association, we use objective data, our decades of expertise, and our unique…

—
7
Ucsf Foundation Investment Company

The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.

Education
8
Us Digital Response

U.s. digital response is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that helps governments, nonprofits, and public entities respond quickly to critical public needs. the organization serves the public by leveraging a network of pro bono…

Public Safety & Disaster
9
Allosource

Inspired by the gift of donation from our communities, allosource responsibly provides innovative cellular and tissue allografts to advance patient healing.

Health
10
Good Samaritan Foundation

Partnering for healing and a healthy future through philanthropy.

—
11
United Food Bank

United Food Bank unites communities to alleviate hunger.

Food & Nutrition
12
Personal Care Products Council Foundation Inc

The foundation is set up to deliver one program - look good feel better. the mission of this nationwide program is to improve the quality of life of women, men, and teens undergoing cancer treatment by offering advice on how to cope with…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Medecins Sans Frontieres Usa Inc; the most unlike its peers is Second Harvest of Silicon Valley. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

10 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 10 of the 15 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
8/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $72,000 · InternationalMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INCUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $32,000 · InternationalUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEFCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC: $30,010 · InternationalCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INCPALESTINE CHILDREN'S RELIEF FUND: $30,000 · InternationalPALESTINE CHILDREN'S RELIEF FUNDDIRECT RELIEF: $17,000 · InternationalDIRECT RELIEFWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $10,000 · InternationalNEW HOPE CHINESE CANCER CARE FOUNDATION: $42,889 · EducationNEW HOPE CHINESE CANCER C…THE CALTECH Y: $24,000 · EducationTHE CALTECH YSAN JOSE CHINESE CATHOLIC MISSION: $12,000 · OtherSAN JOSE CH…CARE'S TURKEY - SYRIA EARTHQUAKES FUND: $7,500 · OtherCARE'S TURK…CHONG HWA SAINT TAO YUAN: $7,000 · OtherCHONG HWA S…SAN JOSE CHINESE CATHOLIC MISSION (SJCCM): $3,000 · OtherSAN JOSE CH…+1 more: $1,000 · OtherSECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY: $5,000 · Food & NutritionALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $1,000 · Health
International$191,010Education$66,889Other$30,500Food & Nutrition$5,000Health$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$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $72,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetNEW HOPE CHINESE CANCER CARE FOUNDATION: $42,889 over 6y, 2.3% of budgetUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $32,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC: $30,010 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPALESTINE CHILDREN'S RELIEF FUND: $30,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CALTECH Y: $24,000 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetDIRECT RELIEF: $17,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $1,000 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 Fmck Lee Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Fmck Lee Foundation. 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%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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 · 0–25%
    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 15 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 2026, released 2026. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Fmck Lee’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