Skip to content
Yan and Liu Family Private Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Yan and Liu Family Private 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.

$9k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$3k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2025.

Education$16kYouth Development$6kCommunity Improvement$6kHuman Services$5kHealth$1kScience & Tech$448Recreation & Sports$404Arts & Culture$350
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,250
Median grant
3
States reached
$255k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
USFAMILYE$3,145
Crochet Circle$2,500
Hausner School$1,250
Harker School$1,250
BE THE CHANGE FOUNDATION$1,000
SVCA$150
KISS institute for practical roboti$150
ACP Foundations$50
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, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%USFAMILYE: $3k → 10%US Family E Inc: $1k → 10%USFAMILYE: $729 → 10%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.

70%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$25k · 9 repeat orgs$10k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
11

Total granted

$25k
$4k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-13%
0%

Still filing today

33%
45%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 37% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24’25
Arts & CultureEducationHuman ServicesRecreation & SportsPhilanthropyHealthOther
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

  • A
    Able2Shine
    2× · 2021–2022 · $8k
  • UI
    USFAMILYE INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $5k
  • J
    Jiaren
    2× · 2021–2022 · $5k

Funded once

  • S
    SVBC
    one grant, 2024 · $2k
  • CS
    Challenger School
    one grant, 2021 · $1k
  • BU
    BETA UNIVERSITYgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $500 · revenue +269%
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
North American Chinese Educational Foundation

The mission of North American Chinese Educational Foundation is to pool its resources and expertise to improve Chinese community educational excellence.

Youth Development
2
Connecting Stem Kids With the Future Inc
—
3
California Invention Convention

The California Invention Convention (CAIC) envisions a day when EVERY child in California has the chance to follow his/her natural curiosity, invent creative solutions to problems, and be inspired to achieve his/her highest level of…

Education
4
Asian American Academy of Science and Engineering Inc

Advance leadership and excellence of science and technology of the United States and to advocate for voices and rights of Asian Americans.To enhance professional communication and foster scientific discoveries and technological…

Science & Tech
5
The Citizen Science Lab

Creating science pipelines for diverse and marginalized communities through life changing hands-on stem experiences.

Human Services
6
The School for Global Thinkers

Our mission is to challenge and nurture young women to thrive in future global markets through personalized STEM advanced academics. Through a supportive small school and single-gender environment, project-based learning, and STEM advanced…

Education
7
Sciencebees Association

The Sciencebees Association is a not-for-profit educational organization whose purpose is to increase the awareness of, exposure to, and participation in inquiry-based science learning. Sciencebee promotes science, technology, engineering…

Youth Development
8
Global Education Project Inc

By bringing together a team of passionate and dedicated individuals, Global Education Project Inc. strives to reduce the growing gap of education around the world, specifically focusing on promoting STEM education amongst children. GEP…

Education
9
P31Girls Incorporated

youth educational and enrichment programs for girls

Youth Development
10
Be Academy of Steam

B.E. Academy for Girls empowers young women through a rigorous, culturally responsive STEAM curriculum that centers identity, cultivates leadership and critical thinking, and integrates real-world experiences to prepare them for college,…

Education
11
Association of Global Intelligent Science and Technology

Promote research in scientific models, methods and technologies with both solid theoretical development and practical importance to advance the scientific understanding of artificial intelligence and its impact on science, technology, and…

Science & Tech
12
American Association of Innovators Inc

Our activities are educational projects. We train individuals to develop computer software. This knowledge will be useful in digital multimedia, graphics, and computer programming. The general public participates in our activities. Our…

Science & Tech
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Exploratorium; the most unlike its peers is Reach to Rize. 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

13 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. 13 of the 24 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/13
Grantees still filing
4/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Able2Shine: $7,600 · OtherAble2ShineJiaren: $4,600 · OtherJiarenPinewood School: $3,300 · OtherPinewood SchoolCROCHET CIRCLE: $2,500 · OtherCROCHET CIRCLESVBC: $1,550 · OtherSVBCHausner School: $1,250 · OtherChallenger School: $1,000 · OtherTIANMUEDUCA: $1,000 · OtherSVCA: $838 · Other+2 more: $235 · OtherUSFAMILYE INC: $4,999 · Human ServicesUSFAMILYE INC+1 more: $70 · Human ServicesNEWSTAR YOUTH FOUNDATION: $2,073 · Arts & CultureNEWSTAR Y…ALLIANCE FOR IMPACT INC: $300 · Arts & CultureALLIANCE …CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES: $299 · Arts & CultureCALIFORNI…THE EXPLORATORIUM: $149 · Arts & CultureTHE HARKER SCHOOL: $1,250 · EducationBETA UNIVERSITY: $500 · EducationKISS Institute for Practical Robotics: $450 · EducationBE THE CHANGE FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 · HealthAQUATICS BOOSTER CLUB: $204 · Recreation & SportsREACH TO RIZE: $200 · Recreation & SportsTOWERCARES FOUNDATION INC: $35 · Philanthropy
Other$23,873Human Services$5,069Arts & Culture$2,821Education$2,200Health$1,000Recreation & Sports$404Philanthropy$35

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 budgetUSFAMILYE INC: $4,999 over 3y, 8.9% of budgetTHE HARKER SCHOOL: $1,250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBE THE CHANGE FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetBETA UNIVERSITY: $500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetKISS Institute for Practical Robotics: $450 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetALLIANCE FOR IMPACT INC: $300 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES: $299 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAQUATICS BOOSTER CLUB: $204 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE EXPLORATORIUM: $149 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetACP Foundation: $70 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTOWERCARES FOUNDATION INC: $35 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.

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.

Texas Instruments Fou…American Online Givin…The Bank of America C…Amazonsmile Foundation
Texas Instruments FoundationTX12.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Texas Instruments Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · 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 Yan and Liu Family Private Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Yan and Liu Family Private Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 30%
  • Kiss Institute for Practical Robotics: 30% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
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.

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 24 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 Yan and Liu Family Private’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