· Private foundation
MY Charitable 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.
Read this first · the figures below need context
68% of MY Charitable Foundation’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 29 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2018, the last year MY Charitable Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 26 organizations, $154k. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2018
- Under $10k23 grants · $48k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $106k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| FIRST EVANGELICAL CHURCH OF SAN GABRIEL VALLEY | $38,000 |
| FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND | $27,000 |
| NEW DAWN CHRISTIAN FAMILY SERVICES | $21,000 |
| AMERICAN HUNANESE ASSOCIATION | $20,000 |
| CHINA EVANGELICAL SEMINARY NORTH AMERICA -CESNA- | $8,500 |
| PASADENA SYMPHONY ASSOCIATION | $3,600 |
| CHINESE AMERICAN PHYSICIANS SOCIETY | $3,000 |
| ASSO OF NO CA CHINESE SCHOOLS | $3,000 |
| RISE & SHINE FOUNDATION | $3,000 |
| LA OPEN TABLE TENNIS | $3,000 |
| HABIBI INTERNATIONAL | $3,000 |
| RENEWAL FOUNDATION INC | $2,500 |
| ARCADIA HIGH SCHOOL CHINESE PARENTS BOOSTER CLUB | $2,400 |
| LOGOS EVANGELICAL SEMINARY | $2,000 |
| GETS THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY FOUNDATION | $2,000 |
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 (FY17–25, $98k) 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
41 repeat relationships — 21 still active in FY2018, 20 since wound down; 44 grantees were first funded in FY2018 (too recent to call). Read against FY2018, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
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, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $24k 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
- CTChinese Theatre Works Inc9× · 2017–2025 · $68k · revenue +34%
- CECHINA EVANGELICAL SEMINARY NORTH AMERICA7× · 2017–2025 · $68k · revenue +177%
- HIHabibi International7× · 2018–2025 · $39k · revenue +240%
Funded once
- CACHINESE AMERICAN COALITION FOR COMPASSIONATE CAREgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $1k · revenue +266%
- NLNEWSONG LOS ANGELES COVENANT CHURCH LOS ANGELES CAone grant, 2017 · $1k
- ICInterVarsity Christian FellowshipUSAone grant, 2017 · $1k · revenue +9%
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.
Charitable, religious & educational
Religious culture and education, meditation and religions comparative study
The mission of NCCCA is to foster cultural exchanges and education, especially in the areas of music and choral art, and to promote Chinese culture.
strives to bridge the culture differences between Asia Community and American main society, by sponsoring and organizing activities to introduce genuine traditional Chinese culture to the general public, introduce American culture to the…
Evangelism to Chinese in the US and Asia including sponsoring seminars retreats as well as evangelists in Taiwan.
China Christian Evangelic mission development
Providing professional training of Chinese Medicine (TCM), including acupuncture, Chinese herbology, acupressure, Qigong and so on, granting the students Masters degree. Its a three to four years teaching program.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Association of Northern California Chinese Schools and the most unlike its peers is Henry E Huntington Library and Art Gallery. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 22 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 25% startups (under 5 years old) — 18% of your grantees by number, and just 7% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 15% 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.
65 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. 65 of the 92 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 FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND ↗
- Who funds GETS THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NEW CARE STREAM INC ↗
- Who funds Chinese Theatre Works Inc ↗
- Who funds CHINA EVANGELICAL SEMINARY NORTH AMERICA ↗
- Who funds CCU HWA KANG INSTITUTE OF NORTH AMERICA ↗
- Who funds NEW DAWN CHRISTIAN FAMILY SERVICES ↗
- Who funds Habibi International ↗
- Who funds CHINESE AMERICAN PHYSICIANS SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds FAMILY KEEPERS INC ↗
- Who funds ASSOCIATION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA CHINESE SCHOOLS ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN HUNANESE ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds CHINESE CLUB OF SAN MARINO ↗
- Who funds THE ASIA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WORLD VISION INC ↗
- Who funds LA OPEN TABLE TENNIS ↗
- Who funds CHINESE CHRISTIAN HERALD CRUSADES INC ↗
- Who funds CHINESE OUTREACH ↗
- Who funds UPWARD BOUND STUDY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds HOPE MEDIA INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds HENRY E HUNTINGTON LIBRARY AND ART GALLERY ↗
- Who funds THE PASADENA SYMPHONY ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CHINESE CULTURE AND EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CHINATOWN SERVICE CENTER ↗
- Who funds WISH OF ANGEL'S MISSIONS ↗
- Who funds American Junior Golf Association Inc ↗
- Who funds Sacred & Profane Chamber Chorus ↗
- Who funds Logos Evangelical Seminary ↗
- Who funds SILOAM CENTER ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COUNCIL OF CHINESE SCHOOLS ↗
- Who funds TAIWANESE BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION OF CA ↗
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: HSL Charitable Foundation · Asian Pacific Community Fund of Southern California · The Frank and Lillian Lee Foundation · The Kao Family Foundation · Grace Glocal Outreach · Icare Philanthropic Foundation · Nume Global Foundation · Chun L And Hsin Y Hsieh Family Foundation aka Cedar Lily Foundation · C & S Tan Family Foundation · King & Joy Foundation · Grace and Li Yu Family Foundation · Christian Community Foundation Inc
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 MY Charitable 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to MY Charitable Foundation?
Find your warmest path to MY Charitable 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.