Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

National Asian Pacific Center on Aging

Since 1979, empowering older adults through advocacy and access to resources essential to their well-being and independence, regardless of language or culture.

$1.6M
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$789k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Human Services$18MEmployment$14MCommunity Improvement$169kHealth$114k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $67k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $463k
  • $250k+2 grants · $1.0M
$182,467
Median grant
5
States reached
$3.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BOSTON GOLDEN AGE CENTER$789,093
SELF-HELP FOR THE ELDERLY$260,666
ACC SENIOR SERVICES$201,462
KOREAN COMM SERVICES OF NY$182,467
CHINESE COMMUNITY CENTER INC$78,583
PHILIP JAISOHN MEMORIAL FOUN$38,333
SER-JOBS FOR PROGRESS$28,750
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $12.8M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 76% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%BOSTON GOLDEN AGE CENTER: $789k → 16%SELF-HELP FOR THE ELDERLY: $1.2M → 10%KOREAN COMM SERVICES OF NY: $182k → 13%CHINESE COMMUNITY CENTER OF HOUSTON TEXAS: $451k → 16%GREATER BOSTON CHINESE GOLDEN AGE CTR: $659k → 11%Greater Boston Chinese Golden Age Center Inc: $750k → 16%SELF-HELP FOR THE ELDERLY: $262k → 10%KOREAN COMMUNITY SERVICES OF METROPOLITAN NEW YORK INC: $174k → 13%CHINESE COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $79k → 16%GREATER BOSTON CHINESE GOLDEN AGE CTR: $631k → 11%GREATER BOSTON CHINESE GOLDEN AGE CENTER: $734k → 16%SELF-HELP FOR THE ELDERLY: $261k → 10%KOREAN COMMUNITY SERVICES OF METROPOLITAN NEW YORK: $168k → 13%Chinese Community Center of Houston Texas: $65k → 16%GREATER BOSTON CHINESE GOLDEN AGE CENTER: $636k → 16%SELF-HELP FOR THE ELDERLY: $260k → 10%Korean Comm Service of NY: $163k → 13%CHINESE COMMUNITY CENTER: $63k → 16%Boston Golden Age Center: $636k → 16%Self-Help for the Elderly: $260k → 10%KOREAN COMMUNITY SERVICES OF METROPOLITAN NEW YORK INC: $163k → 13%Chinese Community Center Inc: $63k → 16%GREATER BOSTON CHINESE GOLDEN AGE CENTER INC: $633k → 16%SELF-HELP FOR THE ELDERLY: $255k → 10%KOREAN COMMUNITY SERVICE OF METRO NY: $1.3M → 13%CHINESE COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $63k → 16%GREATER BOSTON CHINESE GOLDEN AGE CENTER INC: $617k → 16%SELF-HELP FOR THE ELDERLY: $247k → 10%KOREAN COMMUNITY SERVICES OF METROPOLITAN NEW YORK: $170k → 13%CHINESE COMMUNITY CENTER: $63k → 16%SELF-HELP FOR THE ELDERLY: $182k → 10%KOREAN COMMUNITY SERVICE OF METRO NY: $169k → 13%CHINESE COMMUNITY CENTER OF HOUSTON TEXAS: $63k → 16%Self-Help for the Elderly: $112k → 10%Korean Community Service of Metro NY: $159k → 13%CHINESE COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $63k → 16%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$33M · 11 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

11 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
0

Total granted

$33M
$0

Still filing today

91%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesCommunity ImprovementHealthArts & CultureOther

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

  • GB
    GREATER BOSTON CHINESE GOLDEN AGE CENTER
    9× · 2017–2025 · $6.1M · revenue +74%
  • SF
    SELF-HELP FOR THE ELDERLY
    9× · 2017–2025 · $3.0M · revenue +72%
  • KC
    KOREAN COMMUNITY SERVICES OF METROPOLITAN NEW YORK INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $2.7M · revenue +126% · 29% of their budget

Funded once

    Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

    04Your field

    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.

    1
    The Asian-American Senior Citizen Association
    Human Services
    2
    Family Bridges Inc

    We empower individuals, families, and seniors to achieve wellness, stability, and independence through culturally-competent care.

    3
    Asian Pacific Center for Human Development

    To advance the well being of the asian american pacific islander community by providing culturally appropriate and integrated medical, behavioral, and related services.

    Health
    4
    National Asian Pacific Center on Aging

    Since 1979, empowering older adults through advocacy and access to resources essential to their well-being and independence, regardless of language or culture.

    5
    Chinese Culture and Community Service Center Inc

    Provide cultural, social, sports, and educational services and serve functionally and/or cognitively impaired adults with a variety of health, social and other related services.

    Arts & Culture
    6
    Kawabe Memorial House

    To provide quality, secure affordable housing and culturally sensitive programs and services

    Human Services
    7
    Korean Community Center of the East Bay

    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.

    8
    Curry Senior Center

    To provide services to seniors that promote independent living while maintaining their dignity and self-esteem.

    Human Services
    9
    Center for Pan Asian Community Services

    To develop a comprehensive social and health service program to support diverse, multilingual, and under-resourced populations. the center service areas include health counseling, senior services, housing counseling, legal, education, and…

    10
    San Francisco Ladies Protection and Relief Society
    Health
    11
    Asian Health Services

    Asian Health Services (AHS) provides a continuum of medical care, mental health care, dental care and other healthcare services for all, including health education; perinatal services; behavioral health; family and youth services;…

    Health
    12
    Chinese American Senior Services Association Inc

    To provide nutrition Programs and other activities to Senior Citizens

    Human Services

    For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Self-Help for the Elderly and the most unlike its peers is Ser-Jobs for Progress Inc San Joaquin Valley. 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

    10 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 10 of the 11 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.

    2
    Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
    2
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    10/10
    Grantees still filing
    9/10
    Grew since you first funded

    Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

    NATIONAL ABLE NETWORK INC — $11,811,349 · OtherNATIONAL ABLE NETWORK INCASIAN AMERICAN SENIOR CITIZENS SERVICE CENTER INC — $771,362 · OtherASIAN AMERICAN SENIOR CITIZENS SERVICE CENTER IN…THE PHILIP JAISOHN MEMORIAL FOUNDATION — $747,397 · OtherCONTRA COSTA CNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER — $744,982 · OtherGREATER BOSTON CHINESE GOLDEN AGE CENTER — $6,085,463 · Human ServicesGREATER BOSTON CHINESE GOLDEN AGE CENTERSELF-HELP FOR THE ELDERLY — $3,042,935 · Human ServicesSELF-HELP FOR THE ELDERLYKOREAN COMMUNITY SERVICES OF METROPOLITAN NEW YORK INC — $2,670,470 · Human ServicesKOREAN COMMUNITY SERVICES OF METROPOLITAN NE…CHINESE COMMUNITY CENTER INC — $974,448 · Human ServicesCHINESE COMMUNITY CENTER INCCHINESE AMERICAN SERVICE LEAGUE INC — $2,262,716 · Community ImprovementASIAN COMMUNITY CENTER OF SACRAMENTO VALLEY INC DBA ACC SENIOR SERVICES — $2,131,796 · HealthSER-Jobs for Progress Inc San Joaquin Valley — $1,321,513 · Arts & Culture
    Other$14,075,090Human Services$12,773,316Community Improvement$2,262,716Health$2,131,796Arts & Culture$1,321,513

    Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

    25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetNATIONAL ABLE NETWORK INC — $11,811,349 over 7y, 9.6% of budgetGREATER BOSTON CHINESE GOLDEN AGE CENTER — $6,085,463 over 9y, 8.6% of budgetSELF-HELP FOR THE ELDERLY — $3,042,935 over 9y, 5.1% of budgetKOREAN COMMUNITY SERVICES OF METROPOLITAN NEW YORK INC — $2,670,470 over 9y, 29% of budgetCHINESE AMERICAN SERVICE LEAGUE INC — $2,262,716 over 5y, 4.2% of budgetASIAN COMMUNITY CENTER OF SACRAMENTO VALLEY INC DBA ACC SENIOR SERVICES — $2,131,796 over 9y, 6.9% of budgetSER-Jobs for Progress Inc San Joaquin Valley — $1,321,513 over 9y, 10% of budgetCHINESE COMMUNITY CENTER INC — $974,448 over 9y, 9.7% of budgetASIAN AMERICAN SENIOR CITIZENS SERVICE CENTER INC — $771,362 over 5y, 28% of budgetTHE PHILIP JAISOHN MEMORIAL FOUNDATION — $747,397 over 7y, 20% of budget
    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 NATIONAL ABLE NETWORK INC
    • Who funds GREATER BOSTON CHINESE GOLDEN AGE CENTER
    • Who funds SELF-HELP FOR THE ELDERLY
    • Who funds KOREAN COMMUNITY SERVICES OF METROPOLITAN NEW YORK INC
    • Who funds CHINESE AMERICAN SERVICE LEAGUE INC
    • Who funds ASIAN COMMUNITY CENTER OF SACRAMENTO VALLEY INC DBA ACC SENIOR SERVICES
    • Who funds SER-Jobs for Progress Inc San Joaquin Valley
    • Who funds CHINESE COMMUNITY CENTER INC
    • Who funds ASIAN AMERICAN SENIOR CITIZENS SERVICE CENTER INC
    • Who funds THE PHILIP JAISOHN MEMORIAL FOUNDATION

    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.

    Cathay Bank FoundationCA15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: Cathay Bank Foundation · Gofundmeorg · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 National Asian Pacific Center on Aging 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.

    2024
    202122232425
    no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%your share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government
      no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
      0get no government money at all
      9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
      0rely on government for over half their income
      ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
      typical government reliance, FY2025

      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.

      On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 11 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

      Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

      Source object · view filing

      More from the funding graph