Skip to content

· Private foundation

J & M Lam Family 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.

$44k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$33k
Largest
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Animals$89kFood & Nutrition$72kHuman Services$26kHealth$25kReligion$15kCommunity Improvement$4kEducation$3kInternational$3kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $1k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $43k
$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$877k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SAN FRANCISCO CHINATOWN LION CLUB FOUNDATION$33,000
RIVER OF LIFE FOUNDATION$10,000
CHINATOWN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$1,000
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO POLICE ASSOCIATION SURVIVOR BENEFIT FOUNDATION$50
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 (FY17–23, $18k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CHINESE NEWCOMERS SERVICE CTR: $10k → 10%CHINESE NEWCOMERS SERVICE CTR: $3k → 10%CHINESE NEWCOMERS SERVICE CTR: $3k → 10%GUM MOON WOMEN'S RESIDENCE: $1k → 10%GUM MOON WOMEN'S RESIDENCE: $500 → 10%CHINESE NEWCOMERS SERVICE CTR: $300 → 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.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$206k · 11 repeat orgs$38k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +17% since the first grant, against +14% for those funded once.

11 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
20

Total granted

$206k
$37k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+17%
+14%

Still filing today

64%
20%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationReligionHuman ServicesArts & CultureHealthHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • RO
    RIVER OF LIFE FOUNDATION
    5× · 2021–2025 · $72k · revenue +55%
  • CH
    CHINESE HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION
    3× · 2017–2020 · $12k · revenue +15%
  • FB
    FAMILY BRIDGES INC
    3× · 2017–2020 · $5k · revenue +17%

Funded once

  • VC
    VISION CARE FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2020 · $5k
  • RO
    RIVER OF LIFE CHURCH INC
    one grant, 2019 · $5k
  • UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2020 · $3k · revenue 0%
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
U Channel Foundation

Serve the Chinese community in the San Francisco Bay Area and beyond through providing TV and online programs that promote positive cultural and spiritual influences.

Arts & Culture
2
Kong Chow Benevolent Association

Kong Chow Benevolent Association is a mutual benefit organization established to serve both the physical and spiritual needs of the Chinese community in the Bay Area through the operation of the Kong Chow Temple, the Kong Chow cemetery and…

—
3
East Bay Chinese School

East Bay Chinese School's mission is to provide Chinese language and culture classes to educate our students in the appreciation of Chinese heritage, promote cross-cultural understanding and prepare them in becoming community leaders.

—
4
Oakland Chinatown Chamber of Commerce Inc

To promote vitality and growth to businesses and advocate for the Oakland Chinatown community

—
5
Asian American Center of Santa Clara

The mission of Asian American Community Center of Santa Clara County (AASC) is to provide health, human, and economic development services to low income families and individuals to enable them to become actively participating citizens in…

Human Services
6
Chinese Culture Foundation of San Francisco

To elevate underserved communities and gives voice to equality through education and contemporary art.

Arts & Culture
7
Central Chinese High School in America

Operate school to teach Chinese language to students from kindergarten to 12th grade.

Arts & Culture
8
Uc Chinese Alumni Foundation
—
9
California University - Silicon Valley

Providing professional training of Chinese Medicine (TCM), including acupuncture, Chinese herbology, acupressure, Qigong and so on, granting the students Masters degree. Its a three to four years teaching program.

Education
10
Catholic Evangelism to the Chinese

Evangelism to Chinese in the US and Asia including sponsoring seminars retreats as well as evangelists in Taiwan.

Religion
11
Chinatown Community Childrens Center

Our mission is to prepare children for Kindergarten and beyond by promoting educational achievement, ensuring household economic stability and strengthening cultural identity. We fulfill our mission by operating 2 core programs the child…

Human Services
12
San Francisco Guzheng Music Society
Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chinese Hospital Association; the most unlike its peers is River of Life 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

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 33 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SAN FRANCISCO CHINATOWN LION CLUB FOUNDATION: $89,240 · OtherSAN FRANCISCO CHINATOWN LION CLUB FOUNDATIONVISION CARE FOUNDATION: $5,300 · OtherARCHDIOCESE OF SAN FRANCISCO CA: $5,000 · OtherRIVER OF LIFE CHURCH INC: $5,000 · Other+19 more: $30,740 · Other+19 moreRIVER OF LIFE FOUNDATION: $72,000 · Arts & CultureRIVER OF LIFE FOUNDATIONChinese Newcomers Service Center: $16,300 · Human ServicesWomens Division Christian Service Gum Moon Residence Hall: $1,500 · Human ServicesCHINESE HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION: $11,700 · HealthUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $3,000 · EducationMILLBRAE EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC: $1,300 · EducationMILLBRAE MEADOWS PTO: $1,000 · EducationLOVE AND CONFLICT PEACEMAKING MINISTRIES: $1,000 · ReligionCHINESE CHRISTIAN MISSION INC: $200 · ReligionCHINATOWN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $600 · Housing & Shelter
Other$135,280Arts & Culture$72,000Human Services$17,800Health$11,700Education$5,300Religion$1,200Housing & Shelter$600

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 budgetRIVER OF LIFE FOUNDATION: $72,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetChinese Newcomers Service Center: $16,300 over 4y, 1.0% of budgetCHINESE HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION: $11,700 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetFAMILY BRIDGES INC: $4,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWomens Division Christian Service Gum Moon Residence Hall: $1,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMILLBRAE EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC: $1,300 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetLOVE AND CONFLICT PEACEMAKING MINISTRIES: $1,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetMILLBRAE MEADOWS PTO: $1,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetCHINATOWN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHINESE CHRISTIAN MISSION INC: $200 over 2y, 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 RIVER OF LIFE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Chinese Newcomers Service Center ↗
  • Who funds CHINESE HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds FAMILY BRIDGES INC ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Womens Division Christian Service Gum Moon Residence Hall ↗
  • Who funds MILLBRAE EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds LOVE AND CONFLICT PEACEMAKING MINISTRIES ↗
  • Who funds MILLBRAE MEADOWS PTO ↗
  • Who funds CHINATOWN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER ↗
  • Who funds CHINESE CHRISTIAN MISSION INC ↗

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.

United Way of the Bay AreaCA15.5× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United Way of the Bay Area · The San Francisco Foundation · Pov & May Tov Family Foundation · Shp Christian Foundation · San Francisco Association of Realtors Foundation · Asian Pacific Fund · Cathay Bank Foundation · United Way Worldwide · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc

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 J & M Lam Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from J & M Lam Family 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%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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 · 0–30%
    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 J & M Lam Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to J & M Lam Family Foundation 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 33 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 J & M Lam Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph