Skip to content
Yao Hsien Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Yao Hsien Family Foundation

Its FY2026 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$3k
Granted FY2026still arriving
3
Grants FY2026still arriving
2
States reached
$2k
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, FY2018 to 2025.

Health$4kRecreation & Sports$3kPhilanthropy$2kArts & Culture$1kEducation$770Food & Nutrition$643Human Services$603Housing & Shelter$263Other$0
02FY2026 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,215
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
American College of Rheumatology$1,650
European Alliance of Associations f$1,215
Second Harvest of Silicon Valley$20
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 (FY20–23, $767) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%Foundation for a Beautiful Life: $180 → 8%Foundation for a Beautiful Life: $587 → 8%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.

Which US states its grants reach

VT
NY
MA
CA
VA
DE
HI
GA
FL
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 15% of Yao Hsien Family Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 57% of the giving stays in CA; by stated purpose, 51%.

Yao Hsien Family Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 9.9% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

41%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$6k · 5 repeat orgs$9k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +8% since the first grant, against +7% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2026, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2026 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
22

Total granted

$6k
$7k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+8%
+7%

Still filing today

80%
45%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2026, 58% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
HealthArts & CultureRecreation & SportsPhilanthropyHuman ServicesFood & NutritionOther
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

  • AC
    American College of Rheumatology Inc
    2× · 2025–2026 · $4k · revenue 0%
  • G
    GOFUNDMEORG
    4× · 2020–2025 · $773 · revenue -37%
  • FF
    FOUNDATION FOR A BEAUTIFUL LIFE
    2× · 2020–2023 · $767 · revenue +59%

Funded once

  • ZM
    ZEN MARTIAL ARTS FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2025 · $3k
  • TE
    The European Alliance of Associatio
    one grant, 2024 · $995
  • C
    Covenant
    one grant, 2023 · $500
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
Center for Advanced China Research
—
2
Save Cantonese

Save Cantonese is an international movement that sustains and celebrates Cantonese language and culture. We have three Strategic Aims: a) protect and strengthen educational and research infrastructure for the Cantonese language, b) affirm…

Arts & Culture
3
Us - China Policy Foundation
—
4
Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences Foundation
Philanthropy
5
Foundation for Chinese Cultural Heritage
Philanthropy
6
San Francisco Guzheng Music Society
Arts & Culture
7
Lung Cancer Research Foundation

The mission of the lung cancer research foundation is to improve lung cancer outcomes by funding research for the prevention, diagnosis, treatment and cure of lung cancer.

Health
8
Chile-California Council

The Chile-California Council is a San Francisco-based nonprofit dedicated to developing and promoting joint endeavors and cooperative relations between Chile and California, as well as individuals, legal entities and other institutions in…

International
9
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc

The mission of dfci is to provide expert, compassionate, and equitable care to children, adults, and their families, while advancing the understanding, diagnosis, treatment, cure, and prevention of cancer and related diseases. we train new…

Health
10
Chinese Finance Association

Scientific, education and charitable purpose

Arts & Culture
11
Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute

Sanford burnham prebys medical discovery institute's mission is to advance the biomedical sciences by cultivating the next generation of scientific leaders, providing meaningful opportunities for researchers of all backgrounds to learn,…

Health
12
Shanghai Jiao Tong University Foundation of America (Sjtufa)
Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Online Giving Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Sound of Hope Radio Network Inc. 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

15 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 15 of the 29 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
10/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

American College of Rheumatology Inc: $3,649 · OtherAmerican College of Rheumatology IncEuropean Alliance of Associations f: $1,215 · OtherEuropean Alliance of Associations fThe European Alliance of Associatio: $995 · OtherThe European Alliance of AssociatioThe Salvation Army National Corpora: $500 · OtherThe Salvation Army National Corpora+18 more: $1,813 · Other+18 moreZEN MARTIAL ARTS FOUNDATION: $3,360 · Recreation & SportsZEN MARTIAL ARTS FOUNDA…AMERICAN ONLINE GIVING FOUNDATION INC: $1,450 · PhilanthropyAMERICAN ONLINE…GOFUNDMEORG: $773 · PhilanthropyGOFUNDMEORGFOUNDATION FOR A BEAUTIFUL LIFE: $767 · Human ServicesSECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY: $663 · Food & NutritionCovenant: $500 · EducationCHINESE-AMERICAN BIOPHARMACEUTICAL SOCIETY: $400 · Science & Tech
Other$8,172Recreation & Sports$3,360Philanthropy$2,223Human Services$767Food & Nutrition$663Education$500Science & Tech$400

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 budgetAmerican College of Rheumatology Inc: $3,649 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetZEN MARTIAL ARTS FOUNDATION: $3,360 over 1y, 13% of budgetAMERICAN ONLINE GIVING FOUNDATION INC: $1,450 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetGOFUNDMEORG: $773 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR A BEAUTIFUL LIFE: $767 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetSECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY: $663 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCHINESE-AMERICAN BIOPHARMACEUTICAL SOCIETY: $400 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetFANGCAO READING CIRCLE: $200 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetSOUND OF HOPE RADIO NETWORK INC: $130 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPUENTE DE LA COSTA SUR: $103 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE FAMILY GIVING TREE: $70 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $50 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL TROPICAL BOTANICAL GARDEN: $10 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.

Silicon Valley Commun…Morgan Stanley Global…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA11.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Yao Hsien Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Yao Hsien Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%4%8%15%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
    2get no government money at all
    2report 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.

    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 29 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 2026, released 2026. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Yao Hsien 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