Skip to content
Lui Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Lui 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.

$293k
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$60k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0191% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Arts & Culture$769kInternational$216kEducation$79kPhilanthropy$70kHealth$52kYouth Development$15kCommunity Improvement$12kHuman Services$11kOther$0
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $19k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $113k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $160k
$20,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$9.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
China Institute in America$60,000
Individual grant recipient$50,000
UC San Francisco Foundation$50,000
Asian Art Museum$42,100
Chinese Historical Society of America$29,379
Rose Pak Community Fund$20,000
San Francisco opera$12,000
MG2 Foundation$10,000
SF Chinese chamber of commerce$8,800
Individual grant recipient$6,000
US Table Tennis Association$3,333
Chinatown Media and Arts Collaborative$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:

Its human-services grants (FY22–25, $13k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%Chinatown Community Childrens Center: $10k → 10%Chinatown Community Children's Ctr: $2k → 10%Chinatown Media and Arts Collaborative: $1k → 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.

75%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$985k · 10 repeat orgs$335k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +31% since the first grant, against +15% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
13

Total granted

$985k
$204k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+31%
+15%

Still filing today

80%
46%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 55% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $131k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Arts & CulturePhilanthropyYouth DevelopmentEducationHuman ServicesInternationalOther
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

  • SF
    SAN FRANCISCO SYMPHONY
    4× · 2020–2023 · $150k · revenue +4%
  • CH
    CHINESE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA
    6× · 2020–2025 · $118k · revenue +6%
  • CI
    CHINA INSTITUTE IN AMERICA INCORPORATED
    3× · 2023–2025 · $106k · revenue +62%

Funded once

  • FO
    FRIENDS OF THE UNIV OF HONG KONG LTDgraduated
    one grant, 2024 · $77k · revenue +137% · 38% of their budget
  • MP
    Maris Place
    one grant, 2023 · $31k · revenue +15%
  • EI
    ELLIS ISLAND HONORS SOCIETY INC
    one grant, 2024 · $25k · 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
San Francisco Guzheng Music Society
Arts & Culture
2
Foundation for Chinese Cultural Heritage
Philanthropy
3
San Francisco Filipino Cultural Center
Arts & Culture
4
Uc Chinese Alumni Foundation
—
5
Chinese Culture Foundation of San Francisco

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

Arts & Culture
6
California Institute of Contemporary Art
—
7
Japantown Cultural Society
Education
8
San Jose Museum of Art Association

Nurture empathy and connection by engaging communities with socially relevant contemporary art

Arts & Culture
9
Save Cantonese

Save Cantonese is an international movement that sustains and celebrates Cantonese language and culture. We have three Strategic Aims: a) protect and strengthen educational and research infrastructure for the Cantonese language, b) affirm…

Arts & Culture
10
The Zhaoyu Cultural Foundation
Education
11
San Francisco Art Studio Foundation
—
12
Art Foundation
Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Asian Art Museum Foundation of San Francisco; the most unlike its peers is MG2 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

17 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. 17 of the 30 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
11/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ASIAN ART MUSEUM FOUNDATION OF SAN FRANCISCO: $371,475 · Arts & CultureASIAN ART MUSEUM FOUNDATION OF SAN FRANCISCOSAN FRANCISCO SYMPHONY: $150,084 · Arts & CultureSAN FRANCISCO SYMPHONYCHINESE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA: $117,596 · Arts & CultureCHINESE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA+2 more: $32,000 · Arts & CultureLIFE INTERNATIONAL: $110,000 · OtherLIFE INTERNATIONALIndividual grant recipient: $50,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipi…ELLIS ISLAND HONORS SOCIETY INC: $25,000 · OtherELLIS ISLAND HONORS SOC…Wing Luk Museum: $22,575 · OtherWing Luk MuseumSF Musuem of Modern Art: $11,600 · OtherWillie Brown Institute: $10,000 · Other+9 more: $45,388 · Other+9 moreFRIENDS OF THE UNIV OF HONG KONG LTD: $77,000 · EducationFRIENDS OF…UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $50,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY…CHINA INSTITUTE IN AMERICA INCORPORATED: $105,930 · InternationalCHINA INS…ROSE PAK COMMUNITY FUND: $70,000 · PhilanthropyMG2 FOUNDATION: $10,500 · PhilanthropyMaris Place: $31,011 · Youth DevelopmentRAINIER ATHLETES: $15,000 · Youth DevelopmentChinatown Community Childrens Center: $12,000 · Human ServicesCHINATOWN MEDIA AND ARTS COLLABORATIVE: $1,000 · Human ServicesCHINESE HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION: $2,000 · Health
Arts & Culture$671,155Other$274,563Education$127,000International$105,930Philanthropy$80,500Youth Development$46,011Human Services$13,000Health$2,000

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 budgetASIAN ART MUSEUM FOUNDATION OF SAN FRANCISCO: $371,475 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO SYMPHONY: $150,084 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetCHINESE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA: $117,596 over 6y, 5.0% of budgetCHINA INSTITUTE IN AMERICA INCORPORATED: $105,930 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE UNIV OF HONG KONG LTD: $77,000 over 1y, 38% of budgetROSE PAK COMMUNITY FUND: $70,000 over 5y, 7.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMaris Place: $31,011 over 1y, 9.6% of budgetELLIS ISLAND HONORS SOCIETY INC: $25,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO MUSEUM OF MODERN ART: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRAINIER ATHLETES: $15,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetChinatown Community Childrens Center: $12,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO OPERA ASSOCIATION: $12,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMG2 FOUNDATION: $10,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCHINESE HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFAMILY BRIDGES INC: $955 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.

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.

Silicon Valley Commun…The San Francisco Fou…Asian Pacific FundAmerican Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA14.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Asian Pacific Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Lui Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Lui Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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 Lui Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Lui 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 30 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 Lui’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