Skip to content

· Private foundation

Anita and Santosh Mehra 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.

$178k
Granted FY2025still arriving
17
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$28k
Largest
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Human Services$320kHealth$228kAnimals$225kRecreation & Sports$208kEducation$60kInternational$27kHousing & Shelter$25kReligion$19kOther$0
02FY2025 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k10 grants · $20k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $158k
$5,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$1.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
RAPHAEL HOUSE$28,000
HUMANE SOCIETY OF HURON V$25,000
OLYMPIC CLUB FOUNDATION$25,000
SAFE HOUSE CENTER$20,000
MAI FAMILY SERVICES$20,000
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN$20,000
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN$20,000
THE HINDU TEMPLE$5,000
CHILDREN OF SHELTERS$5,000
OLYMPIC CLUB FOUNDATION$3,000
WENDER WEIS FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN$2,000
SAN FRANCISCO SYMPHONY$1,500
SCHOOLS OF SACRED HEART$1,475
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN$1,230
Individual grant recipient$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.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY24–25, $53k) 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%GUIDING EYES FOR THE BLIND: $35 → 9%RAPHAEL HOUSE: $28k → 10%RAPHAEL HOUSE: $25k → 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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.2M · 15 repeat orgs$55k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +39% since the first grant, against -1% for those funded once.

15 repeat relationships: 10 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

15
6

Total granted

$1.2M
$52k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+39%
-1%

Still filing today

53%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4k 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 & CultureEnvironmentEducationHuman ServicesPhilanthropyHealthOther
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

  • UO
    University of Michigan
    9× · 2017–2025 · $265k · revenue +202% · 39% of their budget
  • OC
    OLYMPIC CLUB FOUNDATION
    7× · 2018–2025 · $236k · revenue +39%
  • CO
    Children of Shelters
    5× · 2021–2025 · $105k · revenue +46%

Funded once

  • TP
    TIPPING POINT COMMUNITY
    one grant, 2019 · $25k · revenue -1%
  • DV
    DHANPATMAL VIRMANI EDUCATION TRUST
    one grant, 2020 · $16k
  • SJ
    SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2024 · $8k
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
Boston Architectural College

The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.

—
2
Silicon Schools Fund Inc

The mission of the silicon schools fund is to improve education through supporting the launch of excellent new schools, improving academic instruction in existing schools, and by funding some of the boldest innovations in education…

Education
3
Ucsf Foundation Investment Company

The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.

Education
4
The Bar Association of San Francisco

The bar association of san francisco champions equal access to justice and promotes humanity, excellence, and diversity in the legal profession. we provide legal services to disadvantaged and underserved individuals in san francisco. we…

—
5
United States Naval Institute

Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.

—
6
National Forest Foundation

The national forest foundation (nff), chartered by congress, turns america's love of nature into meaningful action for 193-million acre national forest system through on the ground program work and grant making activities, and accepts and…

Recreation & Sports
7
California Dental Association Foundation

The foundation's mission is to improve the oral health of all californians by supporting the dental profession and its efforts to meet community needs.

Science & Tech
8
American Association for the Advancement of Science

Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…

Science & Tech
9
Arizona Community Foundation

To lead, serve and collaborate to mobilize enduring philanthropy for a better arizona.

Philanthropy
10
International Biomedical Research Alliance

Our mission is to invest in and accelerate the development of the most promising future leaders in biomedical research with global impact.

Health
11
Marin Humane Society

Marin humane transforms lives through exceptional animal care, humane education, and advocacy. every day, marin humane inspires compassion and positive relationships between people and animals.

Animals
12
Eastern National

Eastern national promotes the public's understanding and support of america's national parks and other public trust partners by providing quality educational experiences, products and services.

Recreation & Sports
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Bay Area Discovery Museum; the most unlike its peers is Wender Weis Foundation for Children. 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

17 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. 17 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
9/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

University of Michigan: $265,314 · OtherUniversity of MichiganHUMANE SOCIETY OF HURON V: $250,320 · OtherHUMANE SOCIETY OF HURON VSAFEHOUSE CENTER: $165,000 · OtherSAFEHOUSE CENTERChildren of Shelters: $105,000 · OtherChildren of Shelters+9 more: $81,029 · Other+9 moreOLYMPIC CLUB FOUNDATION: $235,500 · ReligionOLYMPIC CLUB FOUNDAT…MAI FAMILY SERVICES SASHITAL: $95,000 · Arts & Culture+2 more: $1,660 · Arts & CultureRAPHAEL HOUSE OF SAN FRANCISCO INC: $53,000 · Human Services+1 more: $35 · Human ServicesTIPPING POINT COMMUNITY: $25,000 · PhilanthropyDESAI FOUNDATION: $2,000 · PhilanthropyRUSSIAN HILL SCHOOL: $10,880 · EducationAMERICAN NURSES FOUNDATION INC: $500 · EducationBREAST CANCER PREVENTION PARTNERS: $3,500 · HealthLEGACY LAND CONSERVANCY: $100 · EnvironmentNATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION: $60 · Environment
Other$866,663Religion$235,500Arts & Culture$96,660Human Services$53,035Philanthropy$27,000Education$11,380Health$3,500Environment$160

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUniversity of Michigan: $265,314 over 9y, 39% of budgetOLYMPIC CLUB FOUNDATION: $235,500 over 7y, 4.0% of budgetChildren of Shelters: $105,000 over 5y, 9.4% of budgetMAI FAMILY SERVICES SASHITAL: $95,000 over 4y, 9.1% of budgetRAPHAEL HOUSE OF SAN FRANCISCO INC: $53,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetTIPPING POINT COMMUNITY: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetRUSSIAN HILL SCHOOL: $10,880 over 4y, 1.4% of budgetBREAST CANCER PREVENTION PARTNERS: $3,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetDESAI FOUNDATION: $2,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetAMERICAN NURSES FOUNDATION INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBAY AREA DISCOVERY MUSEUM: $160 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLEGACY LAND CONSERVANCY: $100 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION: $60 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $50 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGUIDING EYES FOR THE BLIND 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.

  • Who funds University of Michigan ↗
  • Who funds OLYMPIC CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Children of Shelters ↗
  • Who funds MAI FAMILY SERVICES SASHITAL ↗
  • Who funds RAPHAEL HOUSE OF SAN FRANCISCO INC ↗
  • Who funds TIPPING POINT COMMUNITY ↗
  • Who funds RUSSIAN HILL SCHOOL ↗
  • Who funds BREAST CANCER PREVENTION PARTNERS ↗
  • Who funds WENDER WEIS FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN ↗
  • Who funds DESAI FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SAN FRANCISCO SYMPHONY ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN NURSES FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds BAY AREA DISCOVERY MUSEUM ↗
  • Who funds LEGACY LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds GUIDING EYES FOR THE BLIND INC ↗

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 Endowment FoundationOH10.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Anita and Santosh Mehra Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Anita and Santosh Mehra 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%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 Anita and Santosh Mehra Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Anita and Santosh Mehra 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 Anita and Santosh Mehra’s filings →

    More from the funding graph