Skip to content
Beyond Borders Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Beyond Borders Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$294k
Granted FY2019
10
Grants FY2019
3
States reached
$175k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

96% of Beyond Borders Foundation Inc’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Communities Foundation Of Texas Inc, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 4 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2019, the last year Beyond Borders Foundation Inc named its own grantees at scale: 5 organizations, $294k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

5
’17
4
’18
5
’19
7
’20
2
’21
2
’22
2
’23
5
’24
4
’25

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Philanthropy$2.6MReligion$379kArts & Culture$25kEducation$24kFood & Nutrition$8kHealth$4kHuman Services$3kCommunity Improvement$3kOther$0
02FY2019 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2019

  • Under $10k4 grants · $6k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $42k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $246k
$10,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$3.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BEYOND BORDERS OF COMMUNITIES FNDN FUND$175,000
IK MANZIL$71,000
SIKH COUNCIL ON RELIGION AND EDUCATION INC$12,000
THE CYBER SIKH ORGANIZATION$10,000
BARU SAHIB CHARITIES OF NORTH AMERICA$10,000
GURDWARA SIKH SANGAT$10,000
UNITED SIKH MISSION$5,000
Individual grant recipient$1,000
LEUKEMIA LYMPHOMA SOCIETY$250
UNIV OF MD CP FOUNDATION$25
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 (FY17–25, $562k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%DASVANDH NETWORK: $160k → 16%DASVANDH NETWORK: $3k → 8%SIKH AMERICAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $3k → 14%DASVANDH NETWORK: $136k → 16%DASVANDH NETWORK: $130k → 16%DASVANDH NETWORK: $130k → 16%DASVANDH NETWORK: $276 → 16%DASVANDH NETWORK: $276 → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

MI
NY
OH
NJ
CA
MD
DC
TX
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.4M · 10 repeat orgs$74k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2019, 2 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call). Read against FY2019, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
9

Total granted

$1.4M
$14k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-17%
+117%

Still filing today

40%
22%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 17% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $18k 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
Human ServicesInternationalEducationPhilanthropyCivil RightsReligionOther
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

  • DN
    DASVANDH NETWORK
    7× · 2017–2025 · $560k · revenue ×13
  • BB
    BEYOND BORDERS OF COMMUNITIES FNDN FUND
    3× · 2017–2019 · $458k
  • IM
    IK MANZIL
    3× · 2017–2019 · $212k · revenue -95%

Funded once

  • LB
    LEEDS BECKETT UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2018 · $3k
  • KF
    KAUR FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2018 · $3k
  • TS
    THE SIKH-AMERICAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE INC
    one grant, 2018 · $3k · revenue -100%
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
Sikh American Veterans Alliance Inc
Public Benefit
2
Sanjay Shah Foundation
Philanthropy
3
The Sai Ram Foundation
Philanthropy
4
Sikh Aid Usa

To support needy people of any religion worldwide

Religion
5
Sikh Human Development Foundation

Grant of scholarships

Education
6
Swami Dayanand Education Foundation
Education
7
North Bay Sikh Foundation

Religious organization

Religion
8
The Kailash Goyal Foundation
Philanthropy
9
Simha Foundation
Philanthropy
10
The Sikh Center Sf Bay Area

To promote the sikh religion.

—
11
Nishkam Tv
Arts & Culture
12
Guru Nanak Study Circle

To build a sikh temple that cares about the community, bring spiritualism, peace around inland empire area and around the world. we intend to revive the true teachings of guru nanak dev ji, guru granth sahib ji and all guru sahaibans,…

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Cyber Sikh Organization a Non-Profit California Public Benefit; the most unlike its peers is Ik Manzil. 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

16 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. 16 of the 36 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/16
Grantees still filing
7/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COMMUNITIES FOUNDATION OF TEXAS INC: $2,078,000 · PhilanthropyCOMMUNITIES FOUNDATION OF TEXAS INC+3 more: $9,730 · PhilanthropyBEYOND BORDERS OF COMMUNITIES FNDN FUND: $457,600 · OtherBEYOND BORDERS OF COMMUNIT…IK MANZIL: $212,000 · OtherIK MANZILGURDWARA SIKH SANGAT INC: $80,500 · OtherGURDWARA SIKH SANGAT INC+20 more: $79,286 · Other+20 moreDASVANDH NETWORK: $559,800 · Human ServicesDASVANDH NETWORK+1 more: $2,500 · Human ServicesTHE CYBER SIKH ORGANIZATION A NON-PROFIT CALIFORNIA PUBLIC BENEFIT: $32,025 · EducationDALLAS BAPTIST UNIVERSITY: $12,931 · EducationUnited Sikh Mission: $20,000 · InternationalETERNAL CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $13,000 · InternationalSIKH COUNCIL ON RELIGION AND EDUCATION INC: $27,000 · ReligionSIKH HEALTH CARE FOUNDATION OF NORTH AMERICA: $5,000 · HealthTHE SIKH COALITION: $550 · Civil Rights
Philanthropy$2,087,730Other$829,386Human Services$562,300Education$44,956International$33,000Religion$27,000Health$5,000Civil Rights$550

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 budgetCOMMUNITIES FOUNDATION OF TEXAS INC: $2,078,000 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetDASVANDH NETWORK: $559,800 over 7y, 16% of budgetIK MANZIL: $212,000 over 3y, 11% of budgetTHE CYBER SIKH ORGANIZATION A NON-PROFIT CALIFORNIA PUBLIC BENEFIT: $32,025 over 5y, 1.3% of budgetSIKH COUNCIL ON RELIGION AND EDUCATION INC: $27,000 over 2y, 23% of budgetUnited Sikh Mission: $20,000 over 3y, 3.7% of budgetETERNAL CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $13,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetDALLAS BAPTIST UNIVERSITY: $12,931 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE KROGER CO FOUNDATION: $7,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SIKH-AMERICAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE INC: $2,500 over 1y, 4.2% of budgetPAYPAL CHARITABLE GIVING FUND: $1,730 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNanak Prachar Sabha Inc: $750 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE SIKH COALITION: $550 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGARY SINISE FOUNDATION: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSAN ANTONIO FOOD BANK: $250 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 COMMUNITIES FOUNDATION OF TEXAS INC ↗
  • Who funds DASVANDH NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds IK MANZIL ↗
  • Who funds THE CYBER SIKH ORGANIZATION A NON-PROFIT CALIFORNIA PUBLIC BENEFIT ↗
  • Who funds SIKH COUNCIL ON RELIGION AND EDUCATION INC ↗
  • Who funds United Sikh Mission ↗
  • Who funds ETERNAL CHARITABLE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds DALLAS BAPTIST UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds THE KROGER CO FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SIKH HEALTH CARE FOUNDATION OF NORTH AMERICA ↗
  • Who funds THE SIKH-AMERICAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE INC ↗
  • Who funds PAYPAL CHARITABLE GIVING FUND ↗
  • Who funds Nanak Prachar Sabha Inc ↗
  • Who funds THE SIKH COALITION ↗
  • Who funds GARY SINISE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SAN ANTONIO FOOD BANK ↗

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.

Gurmehar FoundationS Kirpal Singh Family…5Rivers FoundationAmerican Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Gurmehar FoundationCA15.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Gurmehar Foundation · S Kirpal Singh Family Foundation Tr · 5Rivers Foundation · 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 Beyond Borders Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Beyond Borders Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%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
    1get 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 · 0–10%
    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 36 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 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Beyond Borders’ 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