Loading…
· Private foundation
THE LAWRENCE AND SYLVIA WONG
This foundation accepts unsolicited grant applications.
$145k
Granted FY2024
25
Grants
4
Communities
$16k
Largest
01What you fund
0174% classified
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2024.
Environment$1.6MEducation$105kYouth Development$93kArts & Culture$40kHealth$5kOther$658k
02beneath the categories
Past the labels — and the year it shifted
Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.
…and in their own words, year by year
2018
scouts
2019
scouts
2020
—
2021
—
2022
—
2023
—
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2024 · 25 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k19 grants · $72k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $73k
$5,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$3.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
- BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF BENTON HARBOR$16,000
- READ AND WRITE KALAMAZOO$15,000
- CARNEGIE CENTER FOR ARTS (PROGRAM)$12,000
- FOOD BANK OF SOUTH CENTRAL MICHIGAN$10,000
- KALAMAZOO PUBLIC LIBRARY$10,000
- OPEN DOORS$10,000
- GIRSL SCOUTS HEART OF MICHIGAN$9,000
- CRESCENDO MUSIC ACADEMY$8,000
- WESTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY FOUNDAT$6,000
- KALAMAZOO VALLEY COMMUNITY COLLEGE$6,000
- MICHIGAN CROSSROADS COUNCIL$5,000
- KALAMAZOO INSTITUTE OF ARTS$5,000
- KALAMAZOO NATURE CENTER$5,000
- SW MICHIGAN LAND CONSERVANCY$4,000
- THE NATURE CONSERVANCY$4,000
02The need
04
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12% — the area typically sits at 7%. 100% of your dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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 line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
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.
99%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$2.5M · 33 repeat orgs$25k to everyone else
33 repeat relationships — 21 still active in FY2024, 12 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
33
1
Total granted
$2.5M
$6k
Still filing today
42%
0%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $19k went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
EnvironmentEducationYouth DevelopmentArts & CultureHealthOther
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
- RAREAD AND WRITE KALAMAZOO7× · 2018–2024 · $90k · revenue +556%
- BGBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF BENTON HARBOR5× · 2020–2024 · $80k · revenue +152%
FOOD BANK OF SOUTH CENTRAL MICHIGAN8× · 2017–2024 · $65k · revenue +64%
Funded once
- WFWMU FOUNDATIONone grant, 2023 · $6k
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
Land Conservancy of West Michigan
The Land Conservancy of West Michigan exists to help people protect, enjoy and care for natural land in West Michigan.
Environment
2
Kalamazoo College
The mission of kalamazoo college is to prepare its graduates to better understand, live successfully within, and provide enlightened leadership to a richly diverse and increasingly complex world.
Education
3
Leelanau Conservancy
To conserve the land, water, and scenic character of leelanau county, michigan.
Environment
4
Michigan Chamber of Commerce
To promote conditions favorable to job creation and business success in michigan.
—
5
Legacy Land Conservancy
To protect natural areas, working farmlands, waters and recreation spaces in southeastern michigan.
Environment
6
Small Business Association of Michigan
The small business association of michigan's mission is to help michigan small businesses succeed.
—
7
Six Rivers Land Conservancy
To conserve, sustain, and connect natural areas, land, and waters that make the places we live special
Environment
8
Saginaw County Chamber of Commerce
To be a catalyst for economic and community progress within the great lakes bay region.
—
9
Michigan Community College Association
The advancement of community and junior colleges in the state of michigan.
—
10
United Food & Commercial Workers
Labor union representing food and commercial workers, primarily in southeast michigan.
—
11
Lake Michigan Bird Observatory
Bird research and conservation in the western lake michigan region of the united states.
—
12
Grand Traverse Regional Land Conservancy
The mission of gtrlc is to protect significant natural, agricultural, and scenic areas and advance land stewardship now and for future generations.
Environment
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Southwest Michigan Land and the most unlike its peers is The Nature Conservancy. 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
14 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
8/14
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Environment$1,637,000Other$657,500Education$105,000Youth Development$93,000Arts & Culture$40,000Health$5,000
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 KALAMAZOO NATURE CENTER ↗
- Who funds READ AND WRITE KALAMAZOO ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF BENTON HARBOR ↗
- Who funds FOOD BANK OF SOUTH CENTRAL MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds KALAMAZOO INSTITUTE OF ARTS ↗
- Who funds KALAMAZOO VALLEY COMMUNITY COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds MICHIGAN CROSSROADS COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds KALAMAZOO VALLEY COMMUNITY COLLEGE FDN ↗
- Who funds GIRL SCOUTS HEART OF MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds SOUTHWEST MICHIGAN LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds BAT CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds SJOGREN'S SYNDROME FOUNDATION ↗
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.
Kalamazoo Community FoundationMI24.5× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: Kalamazoo Community Foundation · Harold and Grace Upjohn Foundation · Marvin and Rosalie Okun Foundation · Battle Creek Community Foundation · WK Kellogg Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · H P & Genevieve Connable Fund · Preston S and Barbara J Parish · Dorothy U Dalton Foundation Inc · Irving S Gilmore Foundation · John E Fetzer Institute Inc · Gary Sisters 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 organisation THE LAWRENCE AND SYLVIA WONG 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
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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. 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.
05Through Plinth
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: KALAMAZOO VALLEY COMMUNITY COLLEGE.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
low risk
~1582 months of operating runway; revenue contracted over 6 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
6 years of Form 990 filings, still active.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 383363347 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on KALAMAZOO VALLEY COMMUNITY COLLEGE, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 1582 months of cash on hand.
- WatchSustained operations— Filing through 2023; revenue contracted over the period.
- WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 42% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to The Lawrence and Sylvia Wong?
Find your warmest path to The Lawrence and Sylvia Wong through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines