Skip to content

· Private foundation

Zheng Liu Family 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.

$20k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it funds
0188% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$190kEducation$183kScience & Tech$777Human Services$510Health$400Civil Rights$290Philanthropy$100Other$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$9,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$553k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SACRED LOGOS RESOURCE CENTER$10,000
IMMANUEL CHINESE ALLIANCE CHURCH$9,000
GOSPEL CHINESE CHRISTIAN CHURCH$1,000
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.

US giving: 64% of grant dollars ($242k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 36% that went abroad ($137k) is mapped below.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 39% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%ZHEDA ALUMNI FOUNDATION: $4k → 8%GRACE CHINESE CHRISTIAN CHURCH: $7k → 9%SHIN SHIN EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $15k → 10%MERCY FOUNDATION: $200 → 12%NORTH VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $100 → 18%ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY EDUCATION FOUND: $20k → 9%STEPHEN TONG EVANGELISTIC MINISTRIES INTERNATIONAL: $500 → 17%IMMANUEL CHINESE ALLIANCE CHURCH: $9k → 10%HAPPY HEALTHY LIFE CAMP: $1k → 8%SAM RAMON GRACE CHRISTIAN CHURCH: $6k → 9%MSJ PUPS: $2k → 10%ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY EDUCATION FOUNDATION (USA): $5k → 9%IMMANUEL CHINESE ALLIANCE CHURCH: $1k → 10%HARVEST SEMINARY: $21k → 8%SAN RAMON GRACE CHRISTIAN CHURCH: $6k → 9%MSJ PUPS: $1k → 10%ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY EDUCATION FOUNDATION (USA): $5k → 9%GOSPEL CHINESE CHRISTIAN CHURCH: $20k → 8%SAN RAMON GRACE CHRISTIAN CHURCH: $6k → 9%FUTURE ROBOTICS EDUCATION OF MISSION SAN JOSE: $777 → 10%GOSPEL CHINESE CHRISTIAN CHURCH: $18k → 8%GRACE CHINESE CHRISTIAN CHURCH: $4k → 9%SOAR FOUNDATION: $625 → 10%GOSPEL CHINESE CHRISTIAN CHURCH: $18k → 8%SAN RAMON GRACE CHRISTIAN CHURCH: $2k → 9%MSJ PUPS: $560 → 10%GOSPEL CHINESE CHRISTIAN CHURCH: $18k → 8%PARENTS OF UNIVERSAL PERFOMRERS FOU: $510 → 10%HARVEST SEMINARY: $15k → 8%MPPFA: $290 → 10%GASPEL CHINESE CHRISTIAN CHURCH: $9k → 8%MISSION POSSIBLE PFA: $250 → 10%GOSPEL CHINESE CHRISTIAN CHURCH: $1k → 8%MISSION POSSIBLE PFA: $250 → 10%GOSPEL CHINESE CHRISTIAN CHURCH: $1k → 8%MISSION SAN JOSE HIGH SCHOOL: $200 → 10%SACRED LOGOS RESOURCE CENTER: $10k → 8%MISSION SAN JOSE HIGH SCHOOL: $120 → 10%SACRED LOGOS RESOURCE CENTER: $10k → 8%AMERICA CHINESE EVANGELICAL SEMINAR: $200 → 8%EL CAMINO HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $200 → 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.

Beyond the US: 36% of all-years giving ($137k)

1 country, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
China$137k · 1 grant
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

50%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$188k · 10 repeat orgs$191k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +20% since the first grant, against -29% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
15

Total granted

$188k
$191k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+20%
-29%

Still filing today

30%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’22’23’24’25
EducationReligionInternationalHealthOther
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

  • GC
    GOSPEL CHINESE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
    6× · 2017–2025 · $76k
  • HS
    HARVEST SEMINARY INC
    2× · 2019–2020 · $36k · revenue -14%
  • GC
    GRACE CHRISTIAN CHURCH AND WORSHIP CENTER
    4× · 2020–2024 · $20k · revenue +305%

Funded once

  • FN
    FUSHUN NO2 MIDDLE SCHOOL ALUMNI FUND
    one grant, 2023 · $137k
  • ZU
    ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY EDUCATION FOUND
    one grant, 2017 · $20k
  • SS
    SHIN SHIN EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $15k · revenue +40%
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
Sagos Institute of Preaching and Bible Exposition

The mission of our school can be divided into 4 areas:1.To cultivate students exegesis & preaching of the Scriptures rightly based on truth found in Bible. 2.To edify Bible study talents to teach Bible and lead Bible study as the focus of…

Education
2
Systematic Asian Leadership Trainin

Religious training: to assist the church in asia by training its leaders and equipping them to train others.

Religion
3
Chinese Church Support Ministries Usa Inc

Meet needs inside china through bringing awareness and resources.

Religion
4
China Evangelistic Mission Inc

China Christian Evangelic mission development

Religion
5
Logos Taiwan

The specific purpose of this corporation is tosupport, train & develop pastors, ministers, and church leaders for the Evangelical Formosan Church and other Christian denominations.

Religion
6
China Soul for Christ Foundation
Religion
7
China Partner

Help churches in china fulfill the great commission through training emerging christian leaders. train leaders in evangelism, evangelistic preaching, pastoral care and leadership through seminaries and bible school in china. distribute…

—
8
Europe Campus Ministry

The Organization is formed for Christian evangelism and discipleship training as afundamentalist, evangelical, and non-denominational faith-based missionorganization. Its mission is to reach out to students with the whole of gospel ofJesus…

Religion
9
Chinese Christian Fellowship Intl

It is ccf's objective to establish training centers in communities all over the world teaching biblical truth to produce in all who are called to be leaders and participants lives in christ's fullness: 1. study god's word with life…

Religion
10
International Theological Seminary

To provide a center for the study of theology and ministry in evangelical persuasion based upon the infallible and interrant inspired word of God in the bible.

—
11
Logos Evangelical Seminary

Logos Evangelical Seminary equips servant-leaders in the four core areas of spiritual formation, academic excellence, ministerial competence and godly living; to serve Christ's Church and to proclaim the gospel to the world effectively.

Education
12
Slavic Missionary Bible School Inc

Encourage and inspire Christians to fervently serve God, lay a foundation of Biblical truths, guide students in determining their calling, provide practical preparation for ministry and extensive preparation for missionary work, & plant…

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Stephen Tong Evangelistic Ministries International; the most unlike its peers is Grace Christian Church and Worship Center. 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

9 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. 9 of the 26 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)
9/9
Grantees still filing
4/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FUSHUN NO2 MIDDLE SCHOOL ALUMNI FUND: $136,939 · OtherFUSHUN NO2 MIDDLE SCHOOL ALUMNI FUNDGOSPEL CHINESE CHRISTIAN CHURCH: $76,037 · OtherGOSPEL CHINESE CHRISTIAN CHURCHZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY EDUCATION FOUND: $20,000 · OtherZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY EDUCATION FOUNDGRACE CHINESE CHRISTIAN CHURCH: $11,000 · OtherIMMANUEL CHINESE ALLIANCE CHURCH: $10,000 · OtherZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY EDUCATION FOUNDATION (USA): $10,000 · Other+11 more: $22,553 · Other+11 moreHARVEST SEMINARY INC: $36,000 · ReligionHARVEST SEMINARY…GRACE CHRISTIAN CHURCH AND WORSHIP CENTER: $20,000 · ReligionGRACE CHRISTIAN …+1 more: $500 · ReligionSACRED LOGOS RESOURCE CENTER SAGOS: $20,000 · Education+2 more: $825 · EducationSHIN SHIN EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $15,000 · InternationalMERCY FOUNDATION: $200 · HealthNORTH VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $100 · Philanthropy
Other$286,529Religion$56,500Education$20,825International$15,000Health$200Philanthropy$100

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetHARVEST SEMINARY INC: $36,000 over 2y, 11% of budgetGRACE CHRISTIAN CHURCH AND WORSHIP CENTER: $20,000 over 4y, 16% of budgetSACRED LOGOS RESOURCE CENTER SAGOS: $20,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetSHIN SHIN EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetTHE SOAR FOUNDATION: $625 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICA CHINESE EVANGELICAL SEMINARY: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMERCY FOUNDATION: $200 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 HARVEST SEMINARY INC ↗
  • Who funds GRACE CHRISTIAN CHURCH AND WORSHIP CENTER ↗
  • Who funds SACRED LOGOS RESOURCE CENTER SAGOS ↗
  • Who funds SHIN SHIN EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE SOAR FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds STEPHEN TONG EVANGELISTIC MINISTRIES INTERNATIONAL ↗
  • Who funds AMERICA CHINESE EVANGELICAL SEMINARY ↗
  • Who funds MERCY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds NORTH VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗

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.

American Online Giving Foundation IncDE5.3× affinity5 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Zheng Liu Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Zheng Liu Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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 · 0–5%
    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 Zheng Liu Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Zheng Liu 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 26 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 Zheng Liu Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph