Skip to content
Guang-Yu Chinese Culture & Art Center at a glance

· Private foundation

Guang-Yu Chinese Culture & Art Center

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$32k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$28k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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.

Arts & Culture$105kEducation$23kHealth$1kPhilanthropy$1kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $4k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $28k
$2,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$173k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MARYLAND PUBLIC TELEVISION FOUNDATI$28,000
SAN FRANCISCO GU-ZHENG MUSIC SOCIET$2,000
PHILANTHROPIC VENTURES FOUNDATION$1,000
CHINESE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AMERI$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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%NATIONAL BRAIN TUMOR SOCIETY: $1k → 8%Contra Costa Chinese Cultural Enrichment Org: $2k → 9%PURPLE SILK MUSIC EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $9k → 10%SAN FRANCISCO GUZHENG MUSIC SOCIETY: $2k → 10%NATHAN YIP FOUNDATION: $11k → 12%MARYLAND PUBLIC TELEVISION FOUNDATI: $28k → 11%CONTRA COSTA CHINESE CULTURAL ENRICHMENT ORGANIZATION: $640 → 9%PURPLE SILK MUSIC EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $8k → 10%San Francisco Gu-Zheng Music Society: $2k → 10%NATHAN YIP FOUNDATION: $5k → 12%BLACKHAWK MUSEUM: $2k → 9%PURPLE SILK MUSIC EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $7k → 10%SAN FRANCISCO GU-ZHENG MUSIC SOCIET: $2k → 10%NATHAN YIP FOUNDATION: $1k → 12%BLACKHAWK MUSEUM: $1k → 9%PURPLE SILK MUSIC EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $6k → 10%SAN FRANCISCO GU-SHENG MUSIC SOCIET: $2k → 10%NATHAN YIP FOUNDATION: $600 → 12%CONTRA COSTA CHINESE SCHOOL: $3k → 9%PURPLE SILK FOUNDATION: $6k → 10%SAN FRANCISCO GUZHENG MUSIC SOCIETY: $2k → 10%NATHAN YIP FOUNDATION: $500 → 12%Contra Costa Chinese School: $1k → 9%PURPLE SILK FOUNDATION: $4k → 10%SAN FRANCISCO GU-ZHENG MUSIC SOCIET: $2k → 10%NATHAN YIP FOUNDATION: $500 → 12%PURPLE SILK MUSIC EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $2k → 10%SAN FRANCISCO GUZHENG MUSIC SOCIETY: $1k → 10%Nathan Yip Foundation: $500 → 12%PHILANTHROPIC VENTURES FOUNDATION: $1k → 10%SAN FRANCISCO GUZHENG MUSIC SOCIETY: $500 → 10%NATHAN YIP FOUNDATION: $500 → 12%ASIAN ART MUSEUM: $5k → 10%ASIAN ART MUSEUM: $2k → 10%ASIAN ART MUSEUM: $1k → 10%WORLD ARTS WEST: $1k → 10%CHINESE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA: $5k → 10%CHINESE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA: $2k → 10%CHINESE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AMERI: $1k → 10%CHINESE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA: $1k → 10%Chinese Culture Foundation of San Francisco: $1k → 10%CHINESE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AMERI: $1k → 10%CHINESE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA: $1k → 10%Chinese Performing Arts Foundation: $6k → 10%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.

72%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$100k · 8 repeat orgs$39k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
6

Total granted

$100k
$11k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-14%
+32%

Still filing today

63%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 10% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $28k 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 & CulturePhilanthropyOther
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

  • PS
    PURPLE SILK MUSIC EDUCATION FOUNDATION
    5× · 2018–2022 · $32k · revenue -14%
  • NY
    Nathan Yip Foundation
    8× · 2017–2024 · $20k · revenue +82%
  • SF
    San Francisco Guzheng Music Society
    8× · 2017–2025 · $14k · revenue -66%

Funded once

  • CP
    CHINESE PERFORMING ARTS FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $6k
  • CC
    Contra Costa Chinese Cultural Enrichment Org
    one grant, 2017 · $2k
  • CC
    CHINESE CULTURE FOUNDATION OF SAN FRANCISCOgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $1k · revenue +243%
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
Foundation for Chinese Cultural Heritage
Philanthropy
2
Uc Chinese Alumni Foundation
—
3
Asian Art Foundation

To introduce classic chinese culture to the residents of san francisco bay area; to promote ancient asian arts to san francisco bay area.

Arts & Culture
4
The Zhaoyu Cultural Foundation
Education
5
Us - China Policy Foundation
—
6
Chinese Cultural Productions

Chinese Cultural Productions originates and performs challenging and risk taking contemporary American art that is firmly rooted in Chinese cultural traditions. To implement our mission, Chinese Cultural Productions produces an annual San…

Arts & Culture
7
American Friends of the Shanghai Museum Inc

Founded in 1995, the american friends of the shanghai museum is a not-for-profit organization whose mission is to raise awareness and financial support for the shanghai museum, continuing a distinguished history of patron support for…

Arts & Culture
8
Shanghai Sonatas Foundation
Philanthropy
9
Center for Advanced China Research
—
10
Chinese Theatre Works Inc

The organization presents performances, lecture & demonstrations. The goal is to have the people learn more about the the ancient Asian Shadow Theater.

Arts & Culture
11
Tx Performing Chinese Arts
—
12
Chinatown Media and Arts Collaborative

Own and operate a collaborative platform anchored in san francisco chinatown that celebrates, explores, and supports leading and pioneering creative experessions at the intersection of community, culture, art and media.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chinese Culture Foundation of San Francisco; the most unlike its peers is San Francisco Guzheng Music Society. 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

11 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. 11 of the 16 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)
10/11
Grantees still filing
5/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PURPLE SILK MUSIC EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $32,265 · Arts & CulturePURPLE SILK MUSIC EDUCATION FOUNDATIONMPT FOUNDATION INC: $28,000 · Arts & CultureMPT FOUNDATION INCSan Francisco Guzheng Music Society: $13,500 · Arts & CultureSan Francisco Guzheng Music SocietyCHINESE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA: $11,000 · Arts & CultureCHINESE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICAASIAN ART MUSEUM FOUNDATION OF SAN FRANCISCO: $7,500 · Arts & CultureASIAN ART MUSEUM FOUNDATION OF SAN FRANCISCOCONTRA COSTA CHINESE SCHOOL: $3,500 · Arts & Culture+2 more: $2,000 · Arts & CulturePURPLE SILK FOUNDATION: $9,005 · OtherPURPLE SILK FOUND…CHINESE PERFORMING ARTS FOUNDATION: $6,000 · OtherCHINESE PERFORMIN…BLACKHAWK MUSEUM: $3,000 · OtherBLACKHAWK MUSEUMContra Costa Chinese Cultural Enrichment Org: $1,500 · OtherContra Costa Chin…NATIONAL BRAIN TUMOR SOCIETY INC: $1,000 · Other+1 more: $640 · OtherNathan Yip Foundation: $19,835 · PhilanthropyNathan Yip Found…PHILANTHROPIC VENTURES FOUNDATION: $1,000 · Philanthropy
Arts & Culture$97,765Other$21,145Philanthropy$20,835

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPURPLE SILK MUSIC EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $32,265 over 5y, 4.9% of budgetMPT FOUNDATION INC: $28,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetNathan Yip Foundation: $19,835 over 8y, 8.5% of budgetSan Francisco Guzheng Music Society: $13,500 over 8y, 16% of budgetCHINESE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA: $11,000 over 6y, 0.5% of budgetASIAN ART MUSEUM FOUNDATION OF SAN FRANCISCO: $7,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCONTRA COSTA CHINESE SCHOOL: $3,500 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetCHINESE CULTURE FOUNDATION OF SAN FRANCISCO: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL BRAIN TUMOR SOCIETY INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWorld Arts West: $1,000 over 1y, 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.

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.

The San Francisco Fou…Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
The San Francisco FoundationCA14.9× affinity5 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The San Francisco Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Guang-Yu Chinese Culture & Art Center funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Guang-Yu Chinese Culture & Art Center. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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 16 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 Guang-Yu Chinese Culture & Art Center’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