· Private foundation
K & W 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2022–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k11 grants · $9k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $62k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| DACHEN RANG DHARMA CENTER | $25,360 |
| Chinese American Coalition for Compassio | $20,000 |
| Buddhist Tzu Chi Foundation | $17,000 |
| HEART OF HOPE ASIAN AMERICAN HOSPICE | $1,000 |
| American National Red Cross | $1,000 |
| Artssv | $1,000 |
| Second Harvest of Silicon Valley | $1,000 |
| Chung Tai International Chan Buddhist As | $1,000 |
| Dharma Drum Mountain Buddhist Assoc | $1,000 |
| Karma Rimay O Sal Ling | $1,000 |
| Alzheimers Disease and Related Disorders | $810 |
| University of California San Francisco F | $500 |
| Sjdanceco | $300 |
| Baps Endowment Inc | $200 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY25–25, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
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.
14 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- CACHINESE AMERICAN COALITION FOR COMPASSIONATE CARE3× · 2023–2025 · $32k · revenue +136%
- AArtsSV2× · 2023–2025 · $5k · revenue ×5,003
- ADALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC2× · 2024–2025 · $2k · revenue +3%
Funded once
- CFCHINAWIND FOUNDATIONone grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue -31%
- HAHARMONY AMITABHA BUDDHIST ASSOCIATIONone grant, 2024 · $2k · revenue +14%
- HOHEART OF HOPE ASIAN AMERICAN HOSPICone grant, 2023 · $2k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
To create a sanctuary for meditation and Buddhas teachings, welcoming everyone who seeks to end suffering and live in harmony.
Religous guidance for the asian community
The mission of Dharma Drum Retreat Center Inc is to promote the practice of Chinese Chan Buddhism in the western hemisphere. The teaching practiced and taught is based on the Dharma Drum Mountain Lineage developed by the founder Chan…
To advance the teachings of the Sakya and Karma Kagyu schools of Buddhism as embodied by His Holiness Sakya Trichin Ngawang Kunga Thegchin, His Holiness the Karmapa Thaye Dorje and the Fourth Karma Thinley Rinpoche, under the spiritual…
Rooted in the living transmission of Theravada Buddhism, the purpose of the Durango Dharma Center is personal and collective liberation. We practice together to cultivate awakened minds and compassionate hearts. Building a culture of…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Buddhist Tzu Chi Foundation and the most unlike its peers is The Dharma Sanctuary. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 28 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
15 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 15 of the 33 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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 BUDDHIST TZU CHI FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Dechen Rang Dharma Center ↗
- Who funds CHINESE AMERICAN COALITION FOR COMPASSIONATE CARE ↗
- Who funds CHINAWIND FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ArtsSV ↗
- Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds HARMONY AMITABHA BUDDHIST ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds SECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY ↗
- Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
- Who funds NEW HOPE CHINESE CANCER CARE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds TAKING CONTROL OF YOUR DIABETES DBA TCOYD ↗
- Who funds SJDANCECO ↗
- Who funds SHARE OUR STRENGTH ↗
- Who funds The diaTribe Foundation ↗
- Who funds THE DHARMA SANCTUARY ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Chinawind Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · 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 K & W Family 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.
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.