Skip to content
Shirakiku Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Shirakiku 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.

$70k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$13k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0185% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Health$423kHuman Services$121kCommunity Improvement$111kCrime & Legal$18kYouth Development$11kReligion$6kOther$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $37k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $33k
$9,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$1.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FACES THE NATIONAL CRANIOFACIAL ASSOCIATION$13,000
KOREAN AMERICAN SPECIAL EDUCATION CENTER$10,000
KOREISHA SENIOR CARE & ADVOCACY$10,000
WHEELCHAIRS 4 KIDS$9,000
LITTLE TOKYO SERVICE CENTER$9,000
PARENTS HELPING PARENTS$8,000
API RISE$8,000
Individual grant recipient$3,000
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 (FY18–25, $226k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 68% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%JB LINE INC: $5k → 8%PARENTS HELPING PARENTS INC: $16k → 8%HOUSE OF PEACE: $5k → 10%CENTER FOR EMPOWERING REFUGEES & IMMIGRANTS: $5k → 10%JAPANESE AMERICAN SOCIAL SERVICES INC: $8k → 17%WHEELCHAIRS 4 KIDS: $20k → 12%PARENTS HELPING PARENTS INC: $15k → 8%HOUSE OF PEACE: $3k → 10%JAPANESE AMERICAN SOCIAL SERVICES INC: $8k → 17%WHEELCHAIRS 4 KIDS: $20k → 12%PARENTS HELPING PARENTS INC: $14k → 8%HOUSE OF PEACE: $3k → 10%WHEELCHAIRS 4 KIDS: $18k → 12%PARENTS HELPING PARENTS INC: $12k → 8%WHEELCHAIRS 4 KIDS: $17k → 12%PARENTS HELPING PARENTS INC: $10k → 8%WHEELCHAIRS 4 KIDS: $15k → 12%WHEELCHAIRS 4 KIDS: $13k → 12%WHEELCHAIRS 4 KIDS: $10k → 12%WHEELCHAIRS 4 KIDS: $9k → 12%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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$676k · 10 repeat orgs$52k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +34% since the first grant, against +19% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
6

Total granted

$676k
$44k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+34%
+19%

Still filing today

80%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8k 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
Human ServicesHealthCrime & LegalYouth DevelopmentCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • KA
    KOREAN AMERICAN SPECIAL EDUCATION CENTER
    8× · 2018–2025 · $169k · revenue +109%
  • W4
    Wheelchairs 4 Kids Inc
    8× · 2018–2025 · $122k · revenue +411%
  • FT
    FACES The National Craniofacial Association
    8× · 2018–2025 · $112k · revenue +14%

Funded once

  • AF
    ASIANS FOR MIRACLE MARROW MATCHES
    one grant, 2018 · $10k
  • CR
    CANAVAN RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue -100%
  • A
    A3M
    one grant, 2020 · $8k
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
Coalition of Asian Pacifics in Entertainment Foundation Inc

CAPE champions diversity by educating, connecting, and empowering Asian American and Pacific Islander artists and leaders in entertainment and media.

Arts & Culture
2
Korean American Family Services Inc

To support and strengthen korean american families and individuals in the greater los angeles area through counseling, education, and other social services. since its inception in 1983, kfam has provided assistance to tens of thousands of…

Human Services
3
Capc Inc

Maximizing the quality of life for adults with developmental disabilities in their home communities.

Employment
4
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.

—
5
Cambodian Association of Illinois

The mission of CAI is to enable refugees and immigrants from Cambodia residing in Illinois, especially those in metropolitan Chicago, to become self-sufficient, productive participants in American society while preserving and enhancing…

Human Services
6
Asian American Advocacy Alliance
Community Improvement
7
California Alliance of Caregivers

California Alliance of Caregivers represents the voices of relative and non-relative caregivers to promote the well-being of children in foster care. California Alliance of Caregivers provides training information support and advocacy for…

Health
8
Aapi Equity Alliance

Aapi equity alliance is a coalition of community-based organizations that advocates for the rights and needs of the asian and pacific islander (api) community in the greater los angeles area, with particular focus on low-income, immigrant,…

Human Services
9
Asian Pacific Community Counseling

Asian Pacific Community Counseling, Inc., promotes the mental health and wellness of Asian and Pacific Islander communities through culturally and linguistically relevant outreach, prevention, education, therapy, counseling and recovery…

Health
10
Center for the Pacific-Asian Family Inc

Cpaf's mission is to build healthy and safe communities by addressing the root causes and consequences of family violence and violence against women. cpaf is committed to meeting the specific cultural and language needs of asian pacific…

Housing & Shelter
11
Apa Family Support Services

Apafss's mission is to provide culturally appropriate family support services to promote safety, wellness, and economic stability. the agency also advocates for culturally competent services for asians and pacific islanders through…

Unclassified
12
Japanese Home for the Aged

Keiro's mission is to enhance the quality of senior life in our community. (cont'd on schedule o).

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Parents Helping Parents Inc; the most unlike its peers is House of Peace. 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

13 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. 13 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/13
Grantees still filing
10/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Wheelchairs 4 Kids Inc: $122,000 · Human ServicesWheelchairs 4 Kids IncPARENTS HELPING PARENTS INC: $67,000 · Human ServicesPARENTS HELPING PARENTS INCKOREISHA SENIOR CARE & ADVOCACY: $20,000 · Human ServicesKOREISHA SENIOR CARE & ADVOCACYJapanese American Social Services Inc: $16,000 · Human ServicesJapanese American Social Services IncHOUSE OF PEACE: $10,500 · Human Services+2 more: $10,000 · Human ServicesKOREAN AMERICAN SPECIAL EDUCATION CENTER: $169,000 · Youth DevelopmentKOREAN AMERICAN SPECIAL ED…FACES The National Craniofacial Association: $112,000 · HealthFACES The National …CANAVAN RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 · HealthCANAVAN RESEARCH FO…1979 LEGACY CORP: $111,000 · Community Improvement1979 LEGACY CORPIndividual grant recipient: $30,000 · OtherASIANS FOR MIRACLE MARROW MATCHES: $10,000 · OtherA3M: $8,000 · OtherWAT PHRATHAT DOI SUTHEP USA: $6,000 · OtherAPI RISE: $18,000 · Crime & LegalPARENTS HELPING PARENTS - THE ROUNDTABLE OF SUPPORT INC: $8,000 · Crime & Legal
Human Services$245,500Youth Development$169,000Health$122,000Community Improvement$111,000Other$54,000Crime & Legal$26,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetKOREAN AMERICAN SPECIAL EDUCATION CENTER: $169,000 over 8y, 7.0% of budgetWheelchairs 4 Kids Inc: $122,000 over 8y, 2.8% of budgetFACES The National Craniofacial Association: $112,000 over 8y, 13% of budget1979 LEGACY CORP: $111,000 over 8y, 3.8% of budgetPARENTS HELPING PARENTS INC: $67,000 over 5y, 0.6% of budgetKOREISHA SENIOR CARE & ADVOCACY: $20,000 over 3y, 42% of budgetAPI RISE: $18,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetJapanese American Social Services Inc: $16,000 over 2y, 3.9% of budgetHOUSE OF PEACE: $10,500 over 3y, 16% of budgetPARENTS HELPING PARENTS - THE ROUNDTABLE OF SUPPORT INC: $8,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetJB LINE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 4.7% of budgetCENTER FOR EMPOWERING REFUGEES AND IMMIGRANTS: $5,000 over 1y, 0.6% 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.

American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
American Online Giving Foundation IncDE4.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Shirakiku Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Shirakiku Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    3get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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 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 Shirakiku’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