· Private foundation
Yang Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICES | $1,500 |
| FRIENDS OF THE EARTH | $1,500 |
| WORLD WILDLIFE FUND | $1,500 |
| CATHOLIC MEDICAL MISSION BOARD | $1,500 |
| OXFAM AMERICA | $1,500 |
| AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL | $1,500 |
| OPERATION HOMEFRONT | $1,500 |
| COMPASSION & CHOICES | $1,500 |
| AMERICARES | $1,500 |
| PROJECT HOPE | $1,500 |
| HABITAT FOR HUMANITY | $1,500 |
| THE NATURE CONSERVANCY | $1,500 |
| HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH | $1,500 |
| RED ROVER | $1,500 |
| SAVE THE CHILDREN | $1,500 |
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 (FY19–25, $23k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 71% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +27% since the first grant, against +18% for the ones you funded once.
101 repeat relationships — 65 still active in FY2025, 36 since wound down; 8 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, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
- FOFRIENDS OF THE EARTH7× · 2019–2025 · $10k · revenue +89%
- OCOCEAN CONSERVANCY7× · 2019–2025 · $10k · revenue +58%
- NWNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION7× · 2019–2025 · $10k · revenue +66%
Funded once
- YCYAHNUNDASIS CAPITAL CAMPAIGNone grant, 2023 · $6k
- WRWILDLIFE RESCUE REHABILITATION INCone grant, 2023 · $2k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2022 · $1k
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.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…
To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.
RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.
To prevent cruelty to animals, we promote enacting and enforcing good public policies. enacting good laws depends upon electing good lawmakers, and we remind voters which candidates care about and support animal issues.
Wildlife alliance is the leader in direct protection of forests and wildlife in tropical asia. our mission is to combat deforestation, biodiversity loss, climate change, and poverty by partnering with local communities and governments.…
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
Plant with purpose, a christian nonprofit organization, reverses deforestation and poverty around the world by transforming the lives of the rural poor. we do this through: - watershed restoration & regenerative agriculture - savings…
Iatp works locally and globally at the intersection of policy and practice to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.
We work towards a future where birds thrive across the americas because audubon is a powerful, diverse, and ever-growing force for conservation. (continued on schedule o).
To pass animal protection laws, educate the public, and support humane candidates for office.
The wildlife conservation society (wcs) saves wildlife and wild places worldwide through science, conservation action, education, and inspiring people to value nature.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Catholic Medical Mission Board Inc and the most unlike its peers is Good News Foundation of Central New York Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 47 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
98 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. 98 of the 138 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 FRIENDS OF THE EARTH ↗
- Who funds OCEAN CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICARES FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED ANIMAL NATIONS DBA REDROVER ↗
- Who funds THE RESCUE MISSION OF UTICA INC ↗
- Who funds Mercy Ships International ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds CATHOLIC MEDICAL MISSION BOARD INC ↗
- Who funds SIERRA CLUB ↗
- Who funds OXFAM-AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds FOOD FOR THE POOR INC ↗
- Who funds Mercy Corps ↗
- Who funds OPERATION HOMEFRONT INC ↗
- Who funds ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds THE ZAKAT FOUNDATION OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds Feeding America ↗
- Who funds GUIDING EYES FOR THE BLIND INC ↗
- Who funds Keepers of the Wild ↗
- Who funds AUTISM SPEAKS INC ↗
- Who funds THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds COMPASSION & CHOICES ↗
- Who funds AFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds Learning Ally Inc ↗
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: Joseph and Inez E Carbone Foundation · Bank of Utica Foundation Inc · Utica National Group Foundation Inc · Susan & Jerome Ettelson Fund · The James H Wurz Jr and Edward T Wurz Sr Foundation · The Community Foundation of Herkimer and Oneida Counties Inc · Give Lively Foundation Inc · Baird Foundation Inc · Ge Aerospace Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Raymond James Charitable Endowment 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 Yang 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.
- Mercy Corps — 47% of income from government
- Lutheran World Relief Inc — 47% of income from government
- Medical Teams International — 14% of income from government
- Learning Ally Inc — 4% of income from government
- Feed the Children Inc — 1% of income from government
- Americares Foundation Inc — 0% of income from government
- Wounded Warrior Project Inc — 0% of income from government
- Food for the Poor Inc — 0% of income from government
- Oxfam-America Inc — 0% of income from government
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.