· Private foundation
The Hsieh Christian 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k19 grants · $83k
- $10k–50k8 grants · $120k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CHINA SOUL FOR CHRIST | $25,000 |
| OVERSEAS CAMPUS MINISTRIES INC | $24,000 |
| GOSPEL OPERATION INTERNATIONAL (USA) | $12,000 |
| VILLAGE GOSPEL MISSION | $12,000 |
| AMBASSADORS FOR CHRIST INC | $12,000 |
| CHRISTIAN BORN ANEW FELLOWSHIP | $12,000 |
| CAMPUS EVANGELICAL FELLOWSHIP INC | $12,000 |
| THE BLESSINGS CULTURAL MISSION FELLOWSHIP | $10,800 |
| FAMILY KEEPERS INC | $6,000 |
| CHINA EVANGELICAL SEMINARY ASSOCIATION INC | $6,000 |
| CHINA EVANGELICAL SEMINARY NORTH AMERICA | $6,000 |
| THE MEDIA EVANGELISM ASSOCIATION-USA | $6,000 |
| PRISONERS FOR CHRIST OUTREACH MINISTRIES | $6,000 |
| CHRISTIAN RENEWAL MINISTRIES INC | $6,000 |
| JEWS FOR JESUS | $6,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY20–25, $24k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
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.
29 repeat relationships — 26 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- AFAMBASSADORS FOR CHRIST INC6× · 2020–2025 · $72k · revenue +13%
- VGVILLAGE GOSPEL MISSION6× · 2020–2025 · $72k · revenue +112%
- CRChristian Renewal Ministries Inc6× · 2020–2025 · $36k · revenue +94%
Funded once
- IEINDUSTRIAL EVANGELICAL MISSIONS INCone grant, 2020 · $6k · revenue +24%
- GMG MEDIA RESOURCESone grant, 2020 · $3k
- FAFOR ALL SAINTS TEAM MINISTRIESone grant, 2020 · $2k · revenue -43%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
China Christian Evangelic mission development
To spread gospel and provide Christianity training to the people in China through volunteer pastors and church elders from the United States.
Help churches in china fulfill the great commission through training emerging christian leaders. train leaders in evangelism, evangelistic preaching, pastoral care and leadership through seminaries and bible school in china. distribute…
To spread and promote gospel and Christian faith to China
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.
Christian Ministry Activities
Preach gospel through internet and serves Chinese churches.
Our mission is to accomplish the Great Commission through the use of resources of Chinese churches worldwide in mission education, recruitment, training, missionary sending, and all other effective means in collaboration with the Global…
Charitable, religious & educational
To Train Christian Leaders and Plant Churches in China
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ambassadors for Christ Inc and the most unlike its peers is Industrial Evangelical Missions Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 35 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
23 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 23 of the 34 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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 OVERSEAS CAMPUS MINISTRIES INC ↗
- Who funds AMBASSADORS FOR CHRIST INC ↗
- Who funds VILLAGE GOSPEL MISSION ↗
- Who funds GOSPEL OPERATION INTERNATIONAL (USA) ↗
- Who funds CAMPUS EVANGELICAL FELLOWSHIP INC ↗
- Who funds Christian Renewal Ministries Inc ↗
- Who funds CHINA EVANGELICAL SEMINARY NORTH AMERICA ↗
- Who funds FAMILY KEEPERS INC ↗
- Who funds PRISONERS FOR CHRIST OUTREACH MINIS ↗
- Who funds THE MEDIA EVANGELISM ASSOCIATION USA ↗
- Who funds CHINA EVANGELICAL SEMINARY ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds ECHO INC ↗
- Who funds NEW CREATION LIFE MINISTRIES INC ↗
- Who funds Christian Counseling & Educational Foundation ↗
- Who funds The Master's University and Seminary ↗
- Who funds EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES AND REFERRALS CHINA ↗
- Who funds VISION TEAM INTERNATIONAL (USA) INC ↗
- Who funds AGAPE WAY ↗
- Who funds CHINA OUTREACH MINISTRIESINC ↗
- Who funds CHRISTIAN MISSIONS OVERSEAS INC ↗
- Who funds CHINA EVANGELISTIC MISSION INC ↗
- Who funds INDUSTRIAL EVANGELICAL MISSIONS INC ↗
- Who funds FOR ALL SAINTS TEAM MINISTRIES ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Joshua Mission · Adonai Foundation Inc · Kerith Foundation · Ck and Kay Ho Foundation · Nehemiah International Service Incorporation Nis · Eden Bridge Foundation · Christian Community Foundation Inc · T Rowe Price Program for Charitable Giving Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund
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 Hsieh Christian 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Hsieh Christian Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Hsieh Christian 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.