Skip to content
Ong Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Ong Family 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.

$9k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Philanthropy$98kReligion$36kFood & Nutrition$15kEducation$9kArts & Culture$3kHuman Services$1kPublic Safety & Disaster$1kHealth$400Other$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$3,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$48k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LOVE TO EXCELLENCE FOUNDATION$5,000
CHINESE FAMILY FOR CHRIST$3,000
Individual grant recipient$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 (FY19–19, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $1k → 8%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 33% of Ong Family Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Ong Family Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 5.3% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

80%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$58k · 7 repeat orgs$14k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +122% since the first grant, against +26% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
7

Total granted

$58k
$9k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+122%
+26%

Still filing today

57%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 35% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k 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
Arts & CulturePhilanthropyReligionCommunity ImprovementHealthHuman 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

  • CF
    CHINESE FAMILY FOR CHRIST
    6× · 2017–2025 · $28k · revenue +122%
  • RO
    RIVER OF LIFE FOUNDATION
    6× · 2017–2023 · $11k · revenue ×16
  • CM
    CITYTEAM MINISTRIES
    6× · 2018–2024 · $4k · revenue +34%

Funded once

  • LM
    LIGENH MISSION FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $3k · revenue +33%
  • MF
    MINORITIES FOR CHRIST INTERNATIONALgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $2k · revenue +26%
  • KC
    KW CARE DONATION
    one grant, 2024 · $1k
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
Foreign Mission Foundation
—
2
Chinese Christian Life Fellowship Inc

To edify and make disciples of mainland china and overseas chinese christians to become devoted to only one great person: jesus christ the lord and savior and be motivated by only one greater purpose: building up his church for his glory

Religion
3
Asian Mission for Christ

Our mission is to spread the Word and love of God throughout Eastern Asia, particularly among hill-tribe people. The countries we work in include Thailand, Burma, and China. We primarily accomplish this by supporting missionaries in the…

International
4
Chinese Christian Fellowship Intl

It is ccf's objective to establish training centers in communities all over the world teaching biblical truth to produce in all who are called to be leaders and participants lives in christ's fullness: 1. study god's word with life…

Religion
5
Chinese International Missions Inc

Spreading the gospel to chinese people around the world. preaching the gospel to the chinese people; sending mission workers into various countries; helping churches in the u.s. and abroad with a vision for world evangelism.

Religion
6
Chinese Christian Mission Inc

To reach out to the chinese worldwide in local evangelism and foreign missions. this purpose is facilitated through the use of missionaries, evangelism training and literature.

Religion
7
China Soul for Christ Foundation
Religion
8
Taiwanese United Fund
Arts & Culture
9
Chinese Overseas Christian Mission Inc

An evangelical interdenominational missionary society dedicated to reaching chinese for christ.

Religion
10
Asia Us Impact

Religious

Religion
11
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
12
China Evangelistic Mission Inc

China Christian Evangelic mission development

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chinese Family for Christ; the most unlike its peers is Ligenh Mission Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

10 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

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 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 10 of the 17 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
7/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ASIAN PACIFIC COMMUNITY FUND OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $91,052 · OtherASIAN PACIFIC COMMUNITY FUND OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIATHE MAX EDUCATION FUND: $8,600 · OtherTHE MAX EDUCATION FUNDLOVE TO EXCELLENCE FOUNDATION: $5,000 · Other+5 more: $7,800 · Other+5 moreCHINESE FAMILY FOR CHRIST: $27,665 · Community ImprovementCHINESE FAMILY FOR …RIVER OF LIFE FOUNDATION: $11,350 · Arts & CultureKQED INC: $1,580 · Arts & CultureCITYTEAM MINISTRIES: $3,550 · ReligionMINORITIES FOR CHRIST INTERNATIONAL: $2,000 · ReligionLIGENH MISSION FOUNDATION: $3,000 · PhilanthropyCHINESE CANCER MEMORIAL FOUNDATION: $300 · PhilanthropyAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $1,000 · Human ServicesUNITED BREAST CANCER FOUNDATION INC: $100 · Health
Other$112,452Community Improvement$27,665Arts & Culture$12,930Religion$5,550Philanthropy$3,300Human Services$1,000Health$100

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 PACIFIC COMMUNITY FUND OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $91,052 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetCHINESE FAMILY FOR CHRIST: $27,665 over 6y, 2.4% of budgetRIVER OF LIFE FOUNDATION: $11,350 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetCITYTEAM MINISTRIES: $3,550 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetLIGENH MISSION FOUNDATION: $3,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetMINORITIES FOR CHRIST INTERNATIONAL: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetKQED INC: $1,580 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHINESE CANCER MEMORIAL FOUNDATION: $300 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUNITED BREAST CANCER FOUNDATION INC: $100 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.

Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA4.4× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Ong Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ong Family 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%3%5%8%10%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 · 0–10%
    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 Ong Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Ong Family 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 17 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 Ong Family’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