Skip to content
Anup & Parul Sud Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Anup & Parul Sud Family Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$18k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0187% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Health$30kReligion$9kHuman Services$2kArts & Culture$2kPhilanthropy$500Education$250Other$0
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k8 grants · $8k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$1,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$240k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
McLaren Bay Medical Foundation$10,000
Genesee County Free Medical Clinic$2,500
Individual grant recipient$2,000
Flint Institute of Music$1,000
Chinmaya Mission Flint$1,000
Community Foundation of Greater Flint$500
Great Lakes Bay Health Center$500
Martus Luna Memorial Association$500
Whaley Children's Center$250
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 (FY25–25, $250) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%Whaley Children's Center: $250 → 16%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.

57%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$27k · 5 repeat orgs$21k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +24% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
8

Total granted

$27k
$6k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+24%
0%

Still filing today

40%
13%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 20% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $14k 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
HealthArts & CultureHuman ServicesOther
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
    GENESEE COUNTY FREE MEDICAL CLINIC
    6× · 2019–2025 · $13k · revenue +24%
  • MF
    MCLAREN FLINT FOUNDATION
    3× · 2018–2023 · $6k · revenue -19%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    2× · 2022–2023 · $3k

Funded once

  • VI
    VALLEY INDIAN SENIORS ASSOCIATION
    one grant, 2024 · $2k
  • VH
    VISHWA HINDU PARISHAD OF AMERICA INC
    one grant, 2024 · $1k · revenue 0%
  • N
    NRITYANJALI
    one grant, 2021 · $1k
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
Mclaren Port Huron

Mclaren healthcare, through its subsidiaries, will be the best value in healthcare as defined by quality outcomes and cost.

Health
2
Mclaren Greater Lansing

Mclaren health care corporation, along with its subsidiaries, will be michigan's best value in healthcare as defined by quality outcomes and cost.

Health
3
Mclaren Northern Michigan

Mclaren health care, through its subsidiaries, will be the best value in health care as defined by quality outcomes and cost.

Health
4
Mclaren Macomb

Mclaren health care corporation, along with its subsidiaries, will be michigan's best value in healthcare as defined by quality outcomes and cost.

Health
5
Mclaren Northern Michigan Foundation

To receive and administer funds to support the mission of mclaren northern michigan and support programs that enhance the well-being of the community.

Health
6
Northern Michigan Hematology and Oncology

Provide professional services for the diagnosis and treatment of cancer and infectious disease and related conditions.

Health
7
Port Huron Hospital Foundation

We create opportunities to inspire generosity and connect with our community.

—
8
Mclaren Health Management Group

Provision of health care services such as visiting nurse services, hospice services and home medical sales/services.

Health
9
Mymichigan Medical Center Midland

Creating healthy communities - together

Health
10
Huron Memorial Foundation

To help mclaren thumb region obtain financial resources to provide excellence in patient care and services.

—
11
Mclaren Oakland

Mclaren oakland provides primary and specialty health care services guided by the values of integrity, excellence, diversity, and intelligence. we aspire to enhance the quality of life and health status of the people we serve.

Health
12
Greater Flint Health Coalition Inc

Improve the health of genesee county residents. improve the quality and cost effectiveness of the health care system in our community.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mclaren Flint Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Samaritans Healing Hands Inc. 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

8 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. 8 of the 20 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
3/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MCLAREN BAY MEDICAL FOUNDATION: $10,000 · OtherMCLAREN BAY MEDICAL FOUNDATIONIndividual grant recipient: $3,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientGCFMC: $3,000 · OtherGCFMCChinmaya Mission Flint: $2,500 · OtherChinmaya Mission FlintIndividual grant recipient: $2,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientVALLEY INDIAN SENIORS ASSOCIATION: $1,500 · OtherVALLEY INDIAN SENIORS ASSOCIATIONVISHWA HINDU PARISHAD OF AMERICA INC: $1,100 · OtherNRITYANJALI: $1,000 · OtherLUDHIANA CMC EGGLESTON TRUST: $1,000 · OtherSAMARITANS HEALING HANDS INC: $1,000 · Other+5 more: $1,700 · Other+5 moreGENESEE COUNTY FREE MEDICAL CLINIC: $12,500 · HealthGENESEE COUNTY FREE MEDICAL CLINICMCLAREN FLINT FOUNDATION: $6,100 · HealthMCLAREN FLINT FOUNDATIONFlint Institute of Music: $1,000 · Arts & CultureCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF GREATER FLINT: $500 · PhilanthropyWhaley Children's Center Inc: $250 · Human Services
Other$27,800Health$18,600Arts & Culture$1,000Philanthropy$500Human Services$250

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 budgetGENESEE COUNTY FREE MEDICAL CLINIC: $12,500 over 6y, 0.8% of budgetMCLAREN BAY MEDICAL FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetMCLAREN FLINT FOUNDATION: $6,100 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetVISHWA HINDU PARISHAD OF AMERICA INC: $1,100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFlint Institute of Music: $1,000 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 GENESEE COUNTY FREE MEDICAL CLINIC ↗
  • Who funds MCLAREN BAY MEDICAL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds MCLAREN FLINT FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds VISHWA HINDU PARISHAD OF AMERICA INC ↗
  • Who funds Flint Institute of Music ↗
  • Who funds SAMARITANS HEALING HANDS INC ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF GREATER FLINT ↗
  • Who funds Whaley Children's Center 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.

Nartel Family Foundat…Anna Paulina Foundati…Stella & Frederick Lo…Charles Stewart Mott …The Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Nartel Family FoundationMI15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Nartel Family Foundation · Anna Paulina Foundation · Stella & Frederick Loeb Charitable Trust · Charles Stewart Mott Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation 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 Anup & Parul Sud Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Anup & Parul Sud Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%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
    3report 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 Anup & Parul Sud Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Anup & Parul Sud 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 20 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 Anup & Parul Sud 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