Skip to content
S Ku Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

S Ku 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.

$136k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$72k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

Human Services$405kReligion$195kHealth$115kEducation$50kArts & Culture$26kInternational$14kPublic Benefit$150Other$0
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $14k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $50k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $72k
$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$975k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SASCC$71,758
HEART OF HOPE$10,000
CHINESE AMERICAN COALITION OF COMPASSIONATE CARE$10,000
NEW HOPE CHINESE CANCER CARE FOUNDATION$10,000
AACI$10,000
TZE ZHAN MONASTERY$10,000
CITY TEAM$7,000
CUPERTINO SENIOR CENTER$3,500
BLISS AND WISDOM CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION$3,000
CALIFORNIA PHILHARMONIC YOUTH ORCHESTRA$450
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 (FY18–24, $358k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 1% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%GIRLS WHO CODE: $5k → 17%WOMENSV: $3k → 8%SARATOGA AREA SENIOR COORDINATING COUNCIL 19655 ALLENDALE: $300k → 8%SARATOGA AREA SENIOR COORDINATING COUNCIL 19655 ALLENDALE: $50k → 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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

82%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$677k · 11 repeat orgs$148k to everyone else

11 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
14

Total granted

$677k
$128k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+2%
+5%

Still filing today

64%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthHuman ServicesEducationArts & CultureReligionInternationalOther
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

  • SA
    SARATOGA AREA SENIOR COORDINATING COUNCIL
    2× · 2018–2019 · $350k · revenue +92% · 31% of their budget
  • AD
    ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $25k · revenue +11%
  • TA
    THE ASIAN AMERICANS FOR COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $20k · revenue +2%

Funded once

  • NT
    NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $30k · revenue +622%
  • ME
    METRO ED
    one grant, 2023 · $20k
  • J
    JCCAA
    one grant, 2023 · $10k
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
Center for Advanced China Research
—
2
Uc Chinese Alumni Foundation
—
3
San Francisco Guzheng Music Society
Arts & Culture
4
Asian American Advocacy Alliance
Community Improvement
5
Chinese American Womens Benevolent Association
Philanthropy
6
The Asian-American Senior Citizen Association
Human Services
7
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
8
The American Foundation for Chinese Medicine Inc

To advance the knowledge of chinese medicine through education and scientific research.

—
9
The Asia Society

The society is an international nonprofit, nonpartisan organization which connects people and institutions in asia and the world to build understanding, address challenges and maximize opportunities.

International
10
Taiwanese-American Foundation
—
11
Foundation for Chinese Cultural Heritage
Philanthropy
12
Lung Cancer Research Foundation

The mission of the lung cancer research foundation is to improve lung cancer outcomes by funding research for the prevention, diagnosis, treatment and cure of lung cancer.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Girls Who Code Inc; the most unlike its peers is National Taiwan University Academic Development 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

18 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. 18 of the 28 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/18
Grantees still filing
11/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SARATOGA AREA SENIOR COORDINATING COUNCIL: $350,000 · Human ServicesSARATOGA AREA SENIOR COORDINATING COUNCIL+2 more: $7,500 · Human ServicesSASCC: $164,258 · OtherSASCCHEART OF HOPE: $40,000 · OtherHEART OF HOPEMETRO ED: $20,000 · OtherMETRO EDIndividual grant recipient: $10,181 · OtherJCCAA: $10,000 · OtherAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $10,000 · OtherTZE ZHAN MONASTERY: $10,000 · OtherOGAF: $10,000 · Other+3 more: $13,000 · OtherALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $25,000 · HealthALZHEIMER'S…THE ASIAN AMERICANS FOR COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY INC: $20,000 · HealthTHE ASIAN A…CHINESE AMERICAN COALITION FOR COMPASSIONATE CARE: $10,000 · HealthCHINESE AME…AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION: $10,000 · HealthAMERICAN LU…Friends of Children with Special Needs: $10,000 · HealthFriends of …LUPUS FOUNDATION OF AMERICA INC: $10,000 · HealthLUPUS FOUND…NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $30,000 · EducationNEW HOPE CHINESE CANCER CARE FOUNDATION: $20,000 · EducationSARATOGA THEATRE ARTS: $4,000 · EducationCITYTEAM MINISTRIES: $21,000 · ReligionBliss & Wisdom Charitable Organization: $14,000 · InternationalDong Fang Chinese Performing Arts Association: $6,000 · Arts & CultureCALIFORNIA PHILHARMONIC YOUTH ORCHESTRA: $450 · Arts & CultureWreaths Across America: $150 · Public Benefit
Human Services$357,500Other$287,439Health$85,000Education$54,000Religion$21,000International$14,000Arts & Culture$6,450Public Benefit$150

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSARATOGA AREA SENIOR COORDINATING COUNCIL: $350,000 over 2y, 31% of budgetNATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $30,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $25,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCITYTEAM MINISTRIES: $21,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ASIAN AMERICANS FOR COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNEW HOPE CHINESE CANCER CARE FOUNDATION: $20,000 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetBliss & Wisdom Charitable Organization: $14,000 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetCHINESE AMERICAN COALITION FOR COMPASSIONATE CARE: $10,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetAMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFriends of Children with Special Needs: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLUPUS FOUNDATION OF AMERICA INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetDong Fang Chinese Performing Arts Association: $6,000 over 2y, 3.6% of budgetGIRLS WHO CODE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSARATOGA THEATRE ARTS: $4,000 over 1y, 6.7% of budgetHakone Foundation: $3,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetWOMENSV: $2,500 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetWreaths Across America: $150 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.

Sutter Bay Medical Fo…Silicon Valley Commun…Morgan Stanley Global…American Online Givin…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Sutter Bay Medical FoundationCA13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sutter Bay Medical Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · 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 S Ku Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from S Ku Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%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.

    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 28 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 S Ku’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