Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

The Asia Foundation

THE ASIA FOUNDATION (taf) is an international nonprofit organization working to solve the toughest social and economic challenges in asia and the pacific.

$27M
Granted FY2020
5
Grants FY2020
3
States reached
$707k
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 FY20172020.

International$1.9MSocial Science$157kCrime & Legal$98kEnvironment$95kArts & Culture$32kPublic Benefit$25kPhilanthropy$10k
02FY2020 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 5 grants below total $1,156,264 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $27,352,334 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $26,196,070 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2020

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $87k
  • $250k+2 grants · $1.1M
$37,446
Median grant
3
States reached
$90M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CARNEGIE MIDDLE EAST CENTER$706,721
THE HENRY L STIMSON CENTER$362,092
IDEAS42$37,446
NATIONAL CENTER FOR CIVIC INNOVATION INC$25,005
ASIAN ART MUSEUM FOUNDATION OF SAN FRANCISCO$25,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–20) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 94% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%GIVE 2 ASIA: $150k → 10%BISHOP MUSEUM: $7k → 9%NATIONAL CENTER FOR CIVIC INNOVATION INC: $25k → 17%THE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC: $25k → 14%INSTITUTE FOR SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSITION: $37k → 12%COUNCIL ON FOUNDATIONS INC: $10k → 7%NATIONAL CENTER FOR STATE COURTS: $59k → 7%GIRL DETERMINED: $22k → 8%ASIAN ART MUSEUM FOUNDATION OF SAN FRANCISCO: $25k → 10%PACIFIC FORUM CSIS: $10k → 9%IDEAS42: $37k → 17%THE ASPEN INSTITUTE: $50k → 14%COUNCIL ON FOUNDATIONS: $10k → 7%NATIONAL CENTER FOR STATE COURT: $39k → 7%IDEAS42: $19k → 17%ASPEN INSTITUTE: $25k → 14%ACTIONAID USA: $18k → 14%THE HENRY L STIMSON CENTER: $362k → 14%CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE: $52k → 14%CARNEGIE MIDDLE EAST CENTER: $707k → 14%PACIFIC FORUM CSIS: $8k → 14%CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT INTERNATION: $580k → 14%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.

Grants abroad, by region — $23M on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 2 regions, $22M to organizations and $1.5M to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

East Asia and the Pacific$17M · 73% · 415 grants · 651 people

Stated purpose: BOOKS FOR ASIA · ECONOMIC GROWTH · INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

South Asia$6.2M · 27% · 187 grants · 49 people

Stated purpose: ECONOMIC GROWTH · INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS · GOVERNANCE

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.

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.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.7M · 7 repeat orgs$459k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +15% since the first grant, against -5% for the ones you funded once.

7 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2020, 5 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
3

Total granted

$1.7M
$47k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+15%
-5%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2020, 64% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $412k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20
InternationalSocial ScienceArts & CultureCrime & LegalCommunity ImprovementEnvironmentOther

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

  • THE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $100k · revenue +243%
  • NC
    NATIONAL CENTER FOR STATE COURTS
    2× · 2018–2019 · $98k · revenue +42%
  • IF
    Institute for Social and Environmental Transition- International
    2× · 2017–2018 · $74k · revenue +15%

Funded once

  • GD
    GIRL DETERMINED
    one grant, 2018 · $22k · revenue -5%
  • AU
    ACTIONAID USA
    one grant, 2018 · $18k · revenue -13%
  • BM
    BISHOP MUSEUMgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $7k · revenue +94%

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
Center for Global Development

Reduce global poverty and improve lives through innovative economic research that drives better policy and practice by the world's top decision makers. we focus on the intersection of developing countries and the governments, institutions…

Human Services
2
The International Institute for Strategic Studies - Us

To provide accurate, objective information and analysis on international strategic issues for legislators, diplomats, foreign affairs analysts, international business leaders, economists, the military, defense commentators, journalists,…

International
3
United States Naval Institute

Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.

4
Center for Arms Control and

A nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to enhancing international peace and security in the 21st century, thereby retaining its focus on nuclear weapons but expanding to include other present emerging security threats.

International
5
The National Bureau of Asian Research

Nbr conducts advanced independent research on strategic, political, economic, energy, globalization, and health issues affecting u.s. relations with asia. drawing upon an extensive network of the world's leading specialists and leveraging…

6
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
7
Foreign Policy Research Institute

The foreign policy research institute (frpi) is dedicated to producing the highest quality scholarship and nonpartisan policy analysis focused on crucial foreign policy and national security challenges facing the united states. we educate…

International
8
International Aids Vaccine Initiative Inc

A nonprofit scientific research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.

International
9
World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…

International
10
Corporation for National Research Initiatives

Scientific research in information processing; fostering dev. of nat'l inf. infra.

Science & Tech
11
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
12
National Association of Corporate Directors

We empower directors and transform boards to be future ready.

Public Benefit

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Aspen Institute Inc and the most unlike its peers is Girl Determined. 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

14 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
7/14
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE — $1,338,109 · InternationalCARNEGIE ENDOWMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACETHE HENRY L STIMSON CENTER — $362,092 · InternationalTHE HENRY L STIMSON CENTERGIVE2ASIA — $150,000 · InternationalGIVE2ASIA+2 more — $39,300 · InternationalTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC — $100,000 · Social ScienceBEHAVIORAL IDEAS LAB INC — $56,535 · Social ScienceACTIONAID USA — $17,783 · Social ScienceNATIONAL CENTER FOR STATE COURTS — $98,216 · Crime & LegalInstitute for Social and Environmental Transition- International — $73,601 · EnvironmentASIAN ART MUSEUM FOUNDATION OF SAN FRANCISCO — $25,000 · Arts & CultureBISHOP MUSEUM — $7,000 · Arts & CultureNATIONAL CENTER FOR CIVIC INNOVATION IN — $25,005 · Community ImprovementCouncil on Foundations Inc — $20,200 · Philanthropy
International$1,889,501Social Science$174,318Crime & Legal$98,216Environment$73,601Arts & Culture$32,000Community Improvement$25,005Philanthropy$20,200

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetCARNEGIE ENDOWMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE — $1,338,109 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetTHE HENRY L STIMSON CENTER — $362,092 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC — $100,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL CENTER FOR STATE COURTS — $98,216 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetInstitute for Social and Environmental Transition- International — $73,601 over 2y, 4.4% of budgetBEHAVIORAL IDEAS LAB INC — $56,535 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL CENTER FOR CIVIC INNOVATION IN — $25,005 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetASIAN ART MUSEUM FOUNDATION OF SAN FRANCISCO — $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGIRL DETERMINED — $21,739 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetCouncil on Foundations Inc — $20,200 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES — $17,561 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBISHOP MUSEUM — $7,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

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.

National Philanthropic TrustPA8.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 The Asia 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 14 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 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports $24M of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2020, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph