Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

The Leo Koguan 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.

$2.2M
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$1.2M
Largest
01What you fund
0197% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Education$27MScience & Tech$385kCommunity Improvement$125kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $35k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $125k
  • $250k+3 grants · $2.0M
$335,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$2.3M
Total assets

Anchored by a single position — about 97% of reported assets are held in Securities Tesla Inc.

Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JIAO TUNG UNIV ALUMNI FOUNDATION OF AMERICA INC$1,194,700
PEKING UNIVERSITY EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION USA$470,100
TSINGHUA UNIVERSITY$335,000
FORBES GLOBAL CEO CONFERENCE SPONSORSHIP$125,000
FUDAN UNIVERSITY EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION$34,800
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 76% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $50k → 8%PEKING UNIVERSITY EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION USA: $904k → 7%FUDAN UNIVERSITY EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $35k → 11%TSINGHUA EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $1.7M → 14%FORBES GLOBAL CEO CONFERENCE SPONSORSHIP: $125k → 14%SCIENCE FESTIVAL FOUNDATION: $50k → 17%JIAO TUNG UNIV ALUMNI FOUNDATION OF AMERICA INC: $3.1M → 11%STAMFORD UNIVERSITY: $1.0M → 9%GIVE ASIA: $50k → 5%PEKING UNIVERSITY EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION USA: $656k → 7%FUDAN UNIVERSITY EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $35k → 11%TSINGHUA EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $1.7M → 14%COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY: $100k → 17%JIAO TUNG UNIV ALUMNI FOUNDATION OF AMERICA INC: $2.1M → 11%STAMFORD UNIVERSITY: $50k → 9%PEKING UNIVERSITY EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION USA: $635k → 7%FUDAN UNIVERSITY EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $34k → 11%TSINGHUA EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $672k → 14%NEW YORK LAW SCHOOL: $50k → 17%JIAO TUNG UNIV ALUMNI FOUNDATION OF AMERICA INC: $2.1M → 11%PEKING UNIVERSITY EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION USA: $621k → 7%TSINGHUA EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $424k → 14%JIAO TUNG UNIV ALUMNI FOUNDATION OF AMERICA INC: $1.9M → 11%PEKING UNIVERSITY EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION USA: $591k → 7%TSINGHUA EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $50k → 14%JIAO TUNG UNIV ALUMNI FOUNDATION OF AMERICA INC: $1.7M → 11%PEKING UNIVERSITY EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION USA: $539k → 7%JIAO TUNG UNIV ALUMNI FOUNDATION OF AMERICA INC: $1.6M → 11%PEKING UNIVERSITY EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION USA: $537k → 7%JIAO TUNG UNIV ALUMNI FOUNDATION OF AMERICA INC: $1.2M → 11%PEKING UNIVERSITY EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION USA: $470k → 7%JIAO TUNG UNIV ALUMNI FOUNDATION OF AMERICA INC: $1.2M → 11%PEKING UNIVERSITY EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION USA: $464k → 7%JIAO TUNG UNIV ALUMNI FOUNDATION OF AMERICA INC: $1.2M → 11%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.

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.

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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$27M · 5 repeat orgs$610k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +22% since the first grant, against +5% for the ones you funded once.

5 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
3

Total granted

$27M
$150k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+22%
+5%

Still filing today

80%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 79% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $460k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
InternationalEducationOther

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

  • CT
    CHIAO TUNG UNIVERSITY ALUMNI FOUNDATION OF AMERICA INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $16M · revenue +213%
  • PU
    PEKING UNIVERSITY EDUCATION FOUNDATION
    9× · 2017–2025 · $5.4M · revenue -17%
  • TE
    TSINGHUA EDUCATION FOUNDATION NA INC
    5× · 2017–2021 · $4.5M · revenue -95%

Funded once

  • NY
    NEW YORK LAW SCHOOL
    one grant, 2021 · $50k · revenue +5%
  • SF
    SCIENCE FESTIVAL FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $50k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $50k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field
04the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 12 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
5/7
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

CHIAO TUNG UNIVERSITY ALUMNI FOUNDATION OF AMERICA INC — $16,048,289 · OtherCHIAO TUNG UNIVERSITY ALUMNI FOUNDATION OF AMERICA INCSTAMFORD UNIVERSITY — $1,050,000 · OtherSTAMFORD UNIVERSITY+4 more — $560,000 · OtherPEKING UNIVERSITY EDUCATION FOUNDATION (USA) — $5,416,015 · InternationalPEKING UNIVERSITY EDUCATION FOUNDATION (…TSINGHUA EDUCATION FOUNDATION NA INC — $4,509,040 · InternationalTSINGHUA EDUCATION FOUNDATION NA INCFUDAN UNIVERSITY EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION — $104,525 · EducationTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK — $100,000 · EducationNEW YORK LAW SCHOOL — $50,000 · EducationMassachusetts Institute of Technology — $50,000 · Education
Other$17,658,289International$9,925,055Education$304,525

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 budgetPEKING UNIVERSITY EDUCATION FOUNDATION (USA) — $5,416,015 over 9y, 9.7% of budgetTSINGHUA EDUCATION FOUNDATION NA INC — $4,509,040 over 5y, 4.0% of budgetFUDAN UNIVERSITY EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION — $104,525 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK — $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNEW YORK LAW SCHOOL — $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMassachusetts Institute of Technology — $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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 TrustPA9.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift 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 Leo Koguan 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 35%
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology35% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to The Leo Koguan Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Leo Koguan 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.

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 12 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph