Skip to content

· Private foundation

Limnexus 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.

$17k
Granted FY2026still arriving
5
Grants FY2026still arriving
2
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

Education$163kCrime & Legal$67kCivil Rights$4kPublic Benefit$4kHuman Services$2k
02FY2026 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$42k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NEIGHBORHOOD LEGAL SERVICES OF LA$5,000
IAKL FOUNDATION$4,000
NAPABA LAW FOUNDATION$2,500
SCCLA SCHOLARSHIP FUND INC$2,500
KABA FOUNDATION$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:

Its human-services grants (FY24–24, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%KOREAN AMERICAN FAMIYY SERVICE: $2k → 14%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.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$200k · 11 repeat orgs$53k to everyone else

11 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2026, 8 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2026 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
9

Total granted

$200k
$47k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-18%
-9%

Still filing today

18%
56%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2026, 61% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
EducationRecreation & SportsCrime & LegalCivil RightsHuman ServicesOther
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

  • CC
    CALIF CHANGELAWYERS CALIF BAR FNDN
    4× · 2019–2023 · $50k
  • IA
    INTERNATIONAL ASSOC OF KOREAN LAWYE
    6× · 2018–2025 · $28k
  • NL
    NEIGHBORHOOD LEGAL SERVICES OF LA
    4× · 2021–2026 · $20k

Funded once

  • UU
    UNICEF USA UKRAINE CHILDREN'S FUND
    one grant, 2022 · $16k
  • CB
    CALIF BAR FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2018 · $10k
  • AP
    ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN LEADERSHIP F
    one grant, 2021 · $5k
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
National Trans Bar Association
Education
2
Asian American Advocacy Alliance
Community Improvement
3
Aaba Law Foundation

For 30 years, the AABA Law Foundation has provided scholarships and grants to law students committed to the Asian Pacific American community. Our award recipients will utilize their scholarships for school, to provide direct legal support…

Crime & Legal
4
Alliance for Asian American Justice Inc

Coordinate pro bono legal aid for victims of anti-Asian violence.

Civil Rights
5
Japanese Amer Bar Asso Edu Foundati

Law student scholarships

Education
6
Asian Pacific American Lawyers Association of New Jersey Inc

Promote and support a positive image of asian pacific americans in the legal profession. support the entrance and advancement of asian pacific americans into and within the legal community and educate members and the community about issues…

Community Improvement
7
Asian American Bar Association of the Greater Bay Area

The Asian American Bar Association of the Greater Bay Area (AABA) has been the voice of the San Francisco Bay Areas Asian Pacific American (APA) legal community since 1976. AABA fosters professional development, community, and service. We…

—
8
National Asian Pacific American Bar Association

The national asian pacific american bar association (napaba) serves as the national voice for the asian pacific american ("apa") legal profession. napaba promotes justice, equity, and opportunity for asian american, native hawaiian, and…

—
9
Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Aajc Inc

The mission of asian americans advancing justice-aajc (aajc) is to advance civil and human rights for asian americans and to build and promote a fair and equitable society for all.

Civil Rights
10
San Joaquin County Bar Foundation
Unclassified
11
Supreme Judicial Court Historical Society
Arts & Culture
12
National Black Law Students Association

To nbsp;articulate nbsp;and nbsp;promote nbsp;the nbsp;needs nbsp;and nbsp;goals nbsp;of nbsp;black nbsp;law nbsp;students nbsp;and nbsp;effectuate nbsp;change nbsp;in nbsp;the nbsp;legal nbsp;community nbsp;the nbsp;organization nbsp;also…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Napaba Law Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Sccla Scholarship Fund. 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

8 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. 8 of the 22 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
3/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CALIF CHANGELAWYERS CALIF BAR FNDN: $50,000 · OtherCALIF CHANGELAWYERS CALIF BAR FNDNINTERNATIONAL ASSOC OF KOREAN LAWYE: $28,000 · OtherINTERNATIONAL ASSOC OF KOREAN LAWYENEIGHBORHOOD LEGAL SERVICES OF LA: $20,000 · OtherNEIGHBORHOOD LEGAL SERVICES OF LAKABA FOUNDATION: $18,500 · OtherKABA FOUNDATIONSO CALIF CHINESE LAWYERS ASSOC: $17,000 · OtherSO CALIF CHINESE LAWYERS ASSOCUNICEF USA UKRAINE CHILDREN'S FUND: $15,500 · OtherUNICEF USA UKRAINE CHILDREN'S FUNDTHE JOHN M LANGSTON BAR ASSOCIATION: $14,000 · OtherTHE JOHN M LANGSTON BAR ASSOCIATIONJABA EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $12,500 · OtherJABA EDUCATION FOUNDATIONCALIF BAR FOUNDATION: $10,000 · Other+8 more: $27,283 · Other+8 moreTHE NAPABA LAW FOUNDATION: $20,000 · EducationMEXICAN AMERICAN BAR FOUNDATION: $11,500 · Recreation & SportsSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $3,784 · Crime & LegalEQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE: $3,783 · Civil RightsKOREAN AMERICAN FAMILY SERVICES INC: $1,500 · Human Services
Other$212,783Education$20,000Recreation & Sports$11,500Crime & Legal$3,784Civil Rights$3,783Human Services$1,500

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 budgetTHE NAPABA LAW FOUNDATION: $20,000 over 7y, 1.3% of budgetMEXICAN AMERICAN BAR FOUNDATION: $11,500 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $3,784 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE: $3,783 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOMMON CAUSE: $3,783 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJAPANESE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION: $2,500 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetKOREAN AMERICAN FAMILY SERVICES INC: $1,500 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.

  • Who funds THE NAPABA LAW FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds MEXICAN AMERICAN BAR FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE ↗
  • Who funds COMMON CAUSE ↗
  • Who funds SCCLA SCHOLARSHIP FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds JAPANESE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds KOREAN AMERICAN FAMILY SERVICES INC ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Limnexus Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Limnexus 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%1%3%4%5%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 · 0–5%
    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 22 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 Limnexus’ filings →

    More from the funding graph