Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Jiun Hu 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.

$28k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$17k
Largest
01What you fund
0184% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Education$93kReligion$40kInternational$19kHuman Services$10kCivil Rights$4kArts & Culture$3kYouth Development$100Health$100Other$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k6 grants · $11k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $17k
$2,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$391k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SOAR FOUNDATION$17,000
CHRISTIAN SONG-ZHU CARING MINISTRIES$4,000
ZIGEN FUND$3,000
United Moms Charity Association$2,000
CHINESE FOR AFFIRMATIVE ACTION$1,000
Go and Love Foundation$1,000
SACRED HEART SCHOOL$90
02The need
03

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 88% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%GO AND LOVE FOUNDATION: $2k → 7%The Home of Christ Church: $2k → 8%WCEO-VOX NATIVE: $5k → 10%CHINESE FOR AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: $1k → 10%NAMI WALK: $1k → 12%ZIGEN FUND: $3k → 13%United Moms Charity Association: $2k → 8%Go and Love Foundation: $1k → 7%The Home of Christ Church: $2k → 8%WCEO-VOX NATIVE: $4k → 10%CHINESE FOR AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: $1k → 10%NAMI WALK: $500 → 12%ZIGEN FUND: $3k → 13%United Moms Charity Association: $2k → 8%Go and Love Foundation: $1k → 7%The Home of Christ Church: $2k → 8%WCEO-VOX NATIVE: $3k → 10%CHINESE FOR AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: $1k → 10%ZIGEN FUND: $2k → 13%United Moms Charity Association: $2k → 8%Go and Love Foundation: $1k → 7%The Home of Christ Church: $1k → 8%WCEO-VOX NATIVE: $3k → 10%CHINESE FOR AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: $1k → 10%ZIGEN FUND: $2k → 13%UNITED MOMS CHARITY: $2k → 8%Go and Love Foundation: $1k → 7%CALIFORNIA LINE DANCE ASSOCIATION: $3k → 8%WCEO-VOX NATIVE: $3k → 10%United Moms Charity Association: $2k → 8%EVERYBODY PITCH IN: $2k → 8%WCEO-VOX NATIVE: $3k → 10%EVERYBODY PITCH IN: $1k → 8%WCEO-VOX NATIVE: $2k → 10%SACRED HEART SCHOOL: $90 → 8%SOAR FOUNDATION: $17k → 10%NEW HOPE CHINESE CANCER CARE FOUNDATION: $100 → 8%SOAR FOUNDATION: $14k → 10%SOAR FOUNDATION: $13k → 10%SOAR FOUNDATION: $12k → 10%SOAR FOUNDATION: $10k → 10%SOAR FOUNDATION: $10k → 10%SOAR FOUNDATION: $8k → 10%SOAR FOUNDATION: $7k → 10%SOAR FOUNDATION: $2k → 10%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge
repeat funding

Who you back again

Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$188k · 10 repeat orgs$5k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
4

Total granted

$188k
$5k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
+91%

Still filing today

60%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $90 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
EducationReligionPhilanthropyCivil RightsArts & CultureOther

First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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

  • TS
    THE SOAR FOUNDATION
    9× · 2017–2025 · $92k · revenue +147%
  • CS
    CHRISTIAN SONG-ZHU CARING MINISTRIES
    9× · 2017–2025 · $33k · revenue +73%
  • TZ
    THE ZIGEN FUND INC
    4× · 2022–2025 · $10k · revenue +10%

Funded once

  • CL
    CALIFORNIA LINE DANCE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $3k · revenue +91%
  • UM
    UNITED MOMS CHARITY
    one grant, 2021 · $2k
  • BS
    BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA
    one grant, 2017 · $100

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
China Evangelistic Mission Inc

China Christian Evangelic mission development

Religion
2
Chinese Economic Development Council Inc
Human Services
3
Christian Action Asia Inc

Rescuing and restoring abandonded and disabled children on the Tibetan plateau in China, and transforming the communities in which they live.

4
United Foundation for China's Health

UFCH is dedicated to providing or facilitating access to critical medical care for Chinas most disadvantaged groups, including orphans, the homeless, abused women, migrants, and other groups in need of care

International
5
Shoucheng Zhang Foundation
Education
6
Chinese Church Support Ministries Usa Inc

Meet needs inside china through bringing awareness and resources.

Religion
7
Center for Advanced China Research
8
Shin Shin Educational Foundation

Our mission is to provide resources, long term care, love and services to construct or renovate elementary schools in the remote, rural and despondent regions of China. Our vision is to improve their learning environment, and therefore to…

International
9
Uc Chinese Alumni Foundation
10
Loshasa Charity Foundation

to build non for profit hospital and serve the poor in China.

Health
11
Case Studies of Chinese Language Reformers
Arts & Culture
12
World of Angels Foundation Woa Foundation

To rescue and protect homeless dogs by providing financial aid and managerial support to vetted shelters in China.

Animals

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is United Moms Charity Association Inc and the most unlike its peers is Everybody Pitch in. 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 one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 9 of the 15 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/9
Grantees still filing
5/9
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

THE SOAR FOUNDATION — $92,450 · EducationTHE SOAR FOUNDATIONGO AND LOVE FOUNDATION — $6,000 · EducationGO AND LOVE FOUNDATION+1 more — $100 · EducationIndividual grant recipient — $23,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTHE ZIGEN FUND INC — $10,120 · OtherTHE ZIGEN FUND INCHOME OF CHRIST CHURCH — $7,000 · OtherHOME OF CHRIST CHURCHEVERYBODY PITCH IN — $3,000 · OtherEVERYBODY PITCH INUNITED MOMS CHARITY — $2,000 · Other+3 more — $1,690 · OtherCHRISTIAN SONG-ZHU CARING MINISTRIES — $33,000 · ReligionCHRISTIAN SONG-ZHU …UNITED MOMS CHARITY ASSOCIATION INC — $8,000 · PhilanthropyChinese for Affirmative Action — $4,000 · Civil RightsCALIFORNIA LINE DANCE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA — $3,000 · Arts & Culture
Education$98,550Other$46,810Religion$33,000Philanthropy$8,000Civil Rights$4,000Arts & Culture$3,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetTHE SOAR FOUNDATION — $92,450 over 9y, 1.2% of budgetCHRISTIAN SONG-ZHU CARING MINISTRIES — $33,000 over 9y, 16% of budgetTHE ZIGEN FUND INC — $10,120 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetUNITED MOMS CHARITY ASSOCIATION INC — $8,000 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetGO AND LOVE FOUNDATION — $6,000 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetChinese for Affirmative Action — $4,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCALIFORNIA LINE DANCE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA — $3,000 over 1y, 3.9% of budgetNEW HOPE CHINESE CANCER CARE FOUNDATION — $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them

A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds THE SOAR FOUNDATION
  • Who funds CHRISTIAN SONG-ZHU CARING MINISTRIES
  • Who funds THE ZIGEN FUND INC
  • Who funds UNITED MOMS CHARITY ASSOCIATION INC
  • Who funds GO AND LOVE FOUNDATION
  • Who funds Chinese for Affirmative Action
  • Who funds EVERYBODY PITCH IN
  • Who funds CALIFORNIA LINE DANCE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA
  • Who funds NEW HOPE CHINESE CANCER CARE FOUNDATION

The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust IncIN10.2× affinity5 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization Jiun Hu Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%your share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Jiun Hu Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Jiun Hu 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 15 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph