· Public charity
Minkwon Center for Community Action Inc
Companys mission is empowering the korean american community, and wider asian american and immigrant communities, to achieve economic and social justice for all.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 10 grants below total $205,897 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $255,097 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $49,200 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k2 grants · $12k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $131k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $63k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| KOREAN COMMINITY SOLUTIONS OF METROPOLITAN NY | $63,097 |
| CARRIBEAN EQUALITY PROJECT INC | $23,050 |
| WOODSIDE ON THE MOVE INC | $22,550 |
| ASIAN AMERICANS FOR EQUALITY INC | $22,550 |
| PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP ASSOCIATION INC | $21,500 |
| CHINESE PROGRESSIVE ASSOCIATION | $16,050 |
| CHINESE AMERICAN PLANNING COUNCIL | $15,000 |
| KOREAN COMMUNITY MEDIA BROADCASTING | $10,000 |
| IMMIGRANT SOCIAL SERIVCE INC | $6,050 |
| SOUTH ASIAN COUNCIL FOR SOCIAL SERVICES INC | $6,050 |
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 (FY17–24, $417k) 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 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.
16 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down.
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 FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- UCUnited Chinese Association Of Brooklyn Inc7× · 2017–2024 · $189k · revenue +110%
- CPCHINESE-AMERICAN PLANNING COUNCIL INC5× · 2017–2024 · $76k · revenue +162%
- SASOUTH ASIAN COUNCIL FOR SOCIAL SERVICES INC7× · 2017–2024 · $70k · revenue +444%
Funded once
- WFWomen for Afghan Women Incone grant, 2021 · $12k · revenue -61%
- TYTHE YOUNG WOMEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF QUEENSgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $6k · revenue +86%
- KCKOREA COMMUNITY SERVICES OF METROPOLITAN NY INCone grant, 2017 · $6k
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.
CAAAV was founded in 1986 as one of the first groups in the United States to respond to racially motivated violence against Asians. Since then, CAAAV has broaden its focus to address a wide array of needs and challenges facing the Asian…
Coordinate pro bono legal aid for victims of anti-Asian violence.
The Asian Law Caucus's mission is to promote, advance, and represent the legal and civil rights of Asian American Pacific Islander (AAPI) communities, recognizing that social, economic, political and racial inequalities continue to exist…
To support Low-income families Women Minorities Refugees and Immigrants to excel in life by educating inspiring and empowering them to reach their full potentials and achieve their dreams.
The Indo-American Center creates and provides services that facilitate South Asian immigrant adjustment, socio-economic wellbeing, and community through direct service, education and advocacy.
To transform underprivileged and minority communities and individuals into informed and vibrant members of society through civic, educational and personal development programs, by fostering active participation in social and economic…
Various national educational programs and services.
The mission of KCCEB is to empower the Korean American and other communities of the Bay Area through education, advocacy, service and the development of community-based resources.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chinese-American Planning Council Inc and the most unlike its peers is Carribean Equality Project Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
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 19 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 United Chinese Association Of Brooklyn Inc ↗
- Who funds CHINESE-AMERICAN PLANNING COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTH ASIAN COUNCIL FOR SOCIAL SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds CARRIBEAN EQUALITY PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds ORGANIZATION OF CHINESE AMERICANS NY CHAPTER INC ↗
- Who funds Parent Child Relationship Association Inc ↗
- Who funds ASIAN AMERICANS FOR EQUALITY INC ↗
- Who funds BANGLADESHI AMERICAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & YOUTH SERVICE CORP ↗
- Who funds ACADEMY OF MEDICAL & PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES INC DBA RaisingHealth Partners ↗
- Who funds KOREAN COMMUNITY MEDIA BROADCASTING TV INC ↗
- Who funds ADHIKAAR FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND SOCIAL JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds Muslim Community Network Inc ↗
- Who funds IMMIGRANT SOCIAL SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds Women for Afghan Women Inc ↗
- Who funds THE YOUNG WOMEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF QUEENS ↗
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: Asian American Federation Inc · Asian American Coalition for Children and Families Inc · New York Immigration Coalition Inc · Brooklyn Community Foundation · Robin Hood Foundation · The Ong Family Foundation Co Law Office · New York Foundation · New York Women's Foundation Inc · Td Charitable Foundation · 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 Minkwon Center for Community Action Inc 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Minkwon Center for Community Action Inc?
Find your warmest path to Minkwon Center for Community Action Inc 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.