Skip to content
Bose Family Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Bose Family Foundation Inc

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.

$17k
Granted FY2022
7
Grants FY2022
2
States reached
$6k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

100% of Bose Family Foundation Inc’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2022, the last year Bose Family Foundation Inc named its own grantees at scale: 6 organizations, $17k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

3
’17
1
’18
2
’19
3
’20
3
’21
6
’22
1
’23
2
’24
0
’25

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

01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Education$179kPhilanthropy$86kArts & Culture$11kHealth$3kFood & Nutrition$3kReligion$1kInternational$100
02FY2022 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BULLIS PURISSIMA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL$5,500
INDIA LITERACY PROJECT$5,000
BAY AREA CANCER CONNECTIONS$3,000
PRATHAM USA$2,500
NORTHERN CA BENGALI ASSOCIATION$400
PRAGNYA$150
BAY AREA BENGALI MUSIC FESTIVAL$100
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 7% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%BAY AREA CANCER CONNECTIONS: $3k → 7%NABC 2017: $10k → 8%BAY AREA BENGALI MUSIC FESTIVAL: $100 → 10%ROOM TO READ: $200 → 10%PRATHAM USA: $3k → 16%RAMAKRISHNA VEDANTA SOCIETY OF NORTH CAROLINA: $500 → 8%PROMISE WORLDWIDE: $100 → 6%INDIA LITERACY PROJECT: $10k → 8%VEDANTA SOCEITY: $250 → 10%EPISCOPAL DIOCESE OF CALIFORNIA: $250 → 10%PRATHAM USA: $2k → 16%INDIA LITERACY PROJECT: $5k → 8%BAY AREA PRABASI: $100 → 10%INDIA LITERACY PROJECT: $5k → 8%NORTHERN CA BENGALI ASSOCIATION: $400 → 10%INDIA LITERACY PROJECT: $5k → 8%INDIA LITERACY PROJECT: $5k → 8%INDIA LITERACY PROJECT: $3k → 8%PRAGNYA: $150 → 8%PRAGNYA: $100 → 8%BULLIS PURISSIMA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: $6k → 8%BULLIS PURISSIMA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: $6k → 8%BULLIS PURISSIMA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: $6k → 8%INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KANPUR FOUNDATION: $5k → 8%BULLIS PURISSIMA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: $5k → 8%MONTESSORI SCHOOL OF LOS ALTOS: $200 → 8%SECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK: $3k → 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.
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 10% of Bose Family Foundation Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 64% of the giving stays in CA; by stated purpose, 51%.

Bose Family Foundation Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 17% 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.

75%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$69k · 5 repeat orgs$23k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2022, 1 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call). Read against FY2022, 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

5
8

Total granted

$69k
$19k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+22%
+37%

Still filing today

80%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $250 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
EducationHealthInternationalPhilanthropyArts & CultureReligionOther
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

  • IL
    INDIA LITERACY PROJECT
    6× · 2017–2022 · $33k · revenue +22%
  • BE
    BULLIS-PURISSIMA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
    4× · 2020–2023 · $22k · revenue +32%
  • PU
    PRATHAM USA
    2× · 2017–2022 · $5k · revenue +20%

Funded once

  • N2
    NABC 2017
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
  • II
    INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KANPUR FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue -44%
  • SH
    SECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK
    one grant, 2020 · $3k
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
Nalanda 20

Improve excellence and access in higher education. Current focus is on India. Thus, Nalanda 2.0's current focus is to make India's higher education system world-class by building a world-class multidisciplinary research university,…

Education
2
Prasaad
Religion
3
Pravara Vedika
Religion
4
Sri Sarada Mahila Samiti aka Sri Sarada Mahila Samiti of Northern California

The Sri Sarada Mahila Samiti is a California Nonprofit RELIGIOUS Corporation structured for primarily religious purposes. The specific purposes of this corporation are to provide educational programs related to the ancient spiritual wisdom…

Religion
5
Varasiddhi
Arts & Culture
6
International Buddhist Education Foundation
Education
7
Valley Bengali Community

Valley Bengali Community, established in 1987, is a socio-cultural organization promoting Bengali and Indian culture in the San Fernando Valley, Los Angeles area. It is run by volunteers and with the money raised by contributions from…

Arts & Culture
8
Sri Karunamayi Institute of Vedic Studies and Meditation Center

The very essence of spirituality and religion lies in understanding the depth of ancient wisdom, connecting to the divine, and achieving inner peace. our organization, rooted in the profound teachings of vedic scriptures and the practice…

Religion
9
India Awareness Foundation Inc

Public education

Education
10
Prakasam Global Nri Forum

Help poor students in education.

Public Safety & Disaster
11
Sri Aurobindo Learning Center
—
12
Sampradaya Usa

Foster teachings of hindu religion

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Pratham Usa; the most unlike its peers is Ramakrishna Vedanta Society of North Carolina. 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

13 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. 13 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)
13/13
Grantees still filing
9/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $105,000 · EducationTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR …BULLIS-PURISSIMA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: $21,500 · EducationBULLIS-PURISSIMA ELEMENTARY SCHOOLINDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KANPUR FOUNDATION: $5,000 · Education+2 more: $400 · EducationFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $85,658 · Community ImprovementFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GI…INDIA LITERACY PROJECT: $33,000 · InternationalINDIA LITERAC…NABC 2017: $10,000 · OtherNABC 2017Individual grant recipient: $9,600 · OtherIndividua…SECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK: $3,000 · OtherSECOND HA…+5 more: $800 · OtherPRATHAM USA: $4,500 · PhilanthropyBAY AREA CANCER CONNECTIONS: $3,000 · HealthPRAGNYA: $250 · HealthRAMAKRISHNA VEDANTA SOCIETY OF NORTH CAROLINA: $500 · ReligionNORTHERN CALIFORNIA BENGALI ASSOCIATION: $400 · Arts & Culture
Education$131,900Community Improvement$85,658International$33,000Other$23,400Philanthropy$4,500Health$3,250Religion$500Arts & Culture$400

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 budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $105,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $85,658 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINDIA LITERACY PROJECT: $33,000 over 6y, 1.1% of budgetBULLIS-PURISSIMA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: $21,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetINDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KANPUR FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPRATHAM USA: $4,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBAY AREA CANCER CONNECTIONS: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPRAGNYA: $250 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMontessori School of Los Altos: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetROOM TO READ: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBAY AREA PRABASI INC: $100 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.

Charities Aid Foundat…Paypal Charitable Giv…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Charities Aid Foundation AmericaVA9.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Charities Aid Foundation America · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · 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 Bose Family Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Bose Family Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Bose 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