Skip to content
The Sugimoto Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Sugimoto Family Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$340k
Granted FY2025still arriving
21
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$135k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Arts & Culture$931kCommunity Improvement$587kPublic Benefit$330kEducation$165kYouth Development$99kHealth$61kReligion$38kHuman Services$34kOther$0
02FY2025 · 21 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k10 grants · $40k
  • $10k–50k10 grants · $165k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $135k
$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$4.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$135,000
NISEI WEEK FOUNDATION$25,000
JAPANESE AMERICAN NATIONAL MUSEUM$25,000
THE RAFU SHIMPO FOUNDATION$25,000
CENTER THEATRE GROUP$15,000
UCLA FOUNDATION$15,000
JAPANESE AMERICAN CULTURAL AND CMNT$15,000
HEADS UP YOUTH FOUNDATION$15,000
GRATEFUL CRANE ENSEMBLE$10,000
KIZUNA LITTLE TOKYO$10,000
LASC CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER$10,000
USC ARCADIA HOSPITAL$7,500
SUBURBAN OPTIMIST CLUB FOUNDATION$6,000
JAPANESE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE$5,750
CARING SHARING OF SOUTH BAY$5,000
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 (FY23–25, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%CARING SHARING OF SOUTH BAY: $5k → 14%CARING SHARING OF SOUTH BAY: $5k → 14%CARING SHARING OF SOUTH BAY: $5k → 14%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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.0M · 19 repeat orgs$93k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +20% since the first grant, against -33% for those funded once.

19 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
4

Total granted

$2.0M
$40k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+20%
-33%

Still filing today

58%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $53k 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
Arts & CultureCommunity ImprovementHealthPhilanthropyHuman ServicesEducationOther
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

  • 1L
    1979 LEGACY CORP
    8× · 2017–2024 · $561k · revenue +159%
  • JAPANESE AMERICAN NATIONAL MUSEUM
    8× · 2018–2025 · $139k · revenue +94%
  • TR
    THE RAFU SHIMPO FOUNDATION INC
    4× · 2017–2025 · $89k · revenue +12% · 53% of their budget

Funded once

  • NV
    NIKKEI VINTAGE GARDEN FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $15k
  • K
    KIZUNA
    one grant, 2024 · $10k
  • CC
    CREATIVE CLASS COLLECTIVE
    one grant, 2024 · $10k · revenue -33%
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
Japantown Cultural Society
Education
2
California Institute of Contemporary Art
—
3
Uc Chinese Alumni Foundation
—
4
Soka University of America

The mission of soka university of america is to foster a steady stream of global citizens committed to living a contributive life. continued on schedule o.

Education
5
Usc Credit Union Community Foundation
Education
6
Los Angeles International Dance Festival
—
7
The California Endowment
Philanthropy
8
University of Southern California

The central mission of the university of southern california is the development of human beings and society as a whole through the cultivation and enrichment of the human mind and spirit. the principal means by which our mission is…

Education
9
San Francisco Filipino Cultural Center
Arts & Culture
10
Chinese University Alumni Association of Southern California Center for Edu
Education
11
The Honarkar Foundation
Public Benefit
12
Korean American United Foundation
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ucla Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Japanese American National Museum. 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

16 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. 16 of the 32 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
9/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $330,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientJAPANESE AMERICAN CULTURAL AND CMNT: $330,000 · OtherJAPANESE AMERICAN CULTURAL AND CMNTEAST SAN GABRIEL VALLEY JCC: $75,900 · OtherEAST SAN GABRIEL VALLEY JCCTHE HEADS UP YOUTH FOUNDATION INC: $70,800 · OtherTHE HEADS UP YOUTH FOUNDATION INCMT SAC FOUNDATION: $35,000 · Other+13 more: $117,400 · Other+13 more1979 LEGACY CORP: $561,100 · Community Improvement1979 LEGACY CORP+1 more: $10,000 · Community ImprovementJAPANESE AMERICAN NATIONAL MUSEUM: $139,000 · Arts & CultureJAPANESE AMERICAN NATIONA…CENTER THEATRE GROUP OF LOS ANGELES: $121,000 · Arts & CultureCENTER THEATRE GROUP OF L…NISEI WEEK FOUNDATION INC: $111,500 · Arts & CultureNISEI WEEK FOUNDATION INCTHE RAFU SHIMPO FOUNDATION INC: $88,500 · Arts & CultureTHE RAFU SHIMPO FOUNDATIO…SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RADIO: $40,000 · Arts & CultureSOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PUBLI…+1 more: $10,000 · Arts & CultureUCLA FOUNDATION: $110,000 · EducationPasadena City College Foundation: $10,000 · EducationUSC ARCADIA HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $48,000 · HealthUSC ARCADIA HOSPITAL: $7,500 · HealthSuburban Optimist Club Foundation: $17,900 · PhilanthropyCARING AND SHARING OF SOUTH BAY: $15,000 · Human Services
Other$959,100Community Improvement$571,100Arts & Culture$510,000Education$120,000Health$55,500Philanthropy$17,900Human Services$15,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budget1979 LEGACY CORP: $561,100 over 8y, 23% of budgetJAPANESE AMERICAN NATIONAL MUSEUM: $139,000 over 8y, 0.3% of budgetCENTER THEATRE GROUP OF LOS ANGELES: $121,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetNISEI WEEK FOUNDATION INC: $111,500 over 3y, 10% of budgetUCLA FOUNDATION: $110,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetTHE RAFU SHIMPO FOUNDATION INC: $88,500 over 4y, 53% of budgetTHE HEADS UP YOUTH FOUNDATION INC: $70,800 over 6y, 13% of budgetUSC ARCADIA HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $48,000 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetSOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RADIO: $40,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetSuburban Optimist Club Foundation: $17,900 over 3y, 30% of budgetCARING AND SHARING OF SOUTH BAY: $15,000 over 3y, 7.7% of budgetPasadena City College Foundation: $10,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCREATIVE CLASS COLLECTIVE: $10,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetUSC ARCADIA HOSPITAL: $7,500 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds 1979 LEGACY CORP ↗
  • Who funds JAPANESE AMERICAN NATIONAL MUSEUM ↗
  • Who funds CENTER THEATRE GROUP OF LOS ANGELES ↗
  • Who funds NISEI WEEK FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds UCLA FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE RAFU SHIMPO FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds THE HEADS UP YOUTH FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds USC ARCADIA HOSPITAL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RADIO ↗
  • Who funds Suburban Optimist Club Foundation ↗
  • Who funds CARING AND SHARING OF SOUTH BAY ↗
  • Who funds Pasadena City College Foundation ↗
  • Who funds KIZUNA LITTLE TOKYO INC ↗
  • Who funds GRATEFUL CRANE ENSEMBLE INC ↗
  • Who funds CREATIVE CLASS COLLECTIVE ↗
  • Who funds USC ARCADIA HOSPITAL ↗

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.

California Community …Sempra FoundationDonor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
California Community FoundationCA14.1× affinity5 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: California Community Foundation · Sempra Foundation · 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 The Sugimoto Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Sugimoto Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Sugimoto Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Sugimoto Family 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 32 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 Sugimoto Family’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