Skip to content
Chaudhari Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Chaudhari Family Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$104k
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2024.

Education$408kHealth$17kRecreation & Sports$15kInternational$13kCommunity Improvement$3kArts & Culture$500Human Services$500
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $4k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $100k
$2,500
Median grant
3
States reached
$2.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY$100,000
PACE EMPOWERMENT PROJECT$2,500
ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL$1,200
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 (FY17–17, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, 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%THE FULFILMENT FUND: $5k → 14%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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$417k · 3 repeat orgs$40k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +78% since the first grant, against -18% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
13

Total granted

$417k
$38k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+78%
-18%

Still filing today

67%
62%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’20’21’22’23’24
HealthHuman ServicesInternationalArts & CultureCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • US
    UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY
    4× · 2021–2024 · $400k
  • AH
    American Heart Association Inc
    2× · 2017–2020 · $11k · revenue +33%
  • ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $6k · revenue +78%

Funded once

  • WC
    WEST COAST SPORTS MEDICINE FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2020 · $15k · revenue -18%
  • SF
    SEVA FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $6k · revenue -73%
  • FF
    FULFILLMENT FUND
    one grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue -18%
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
Well Aware Inc

Well Aware's mission is to provide innovative and sustainable solutions to water scarcity and contamination in East Africa.

International
2
Children's Heartlink

We save children's lives by transforming pediatric heart care in underserved parts of the world.

—
3
Healing Waters International Inc

Healing waters international works to reduce water-related illness and death in developing countries by implementing sustainable projects and programs that make safe drinking water accessible to vulnerable communities and empower local…

International
4
Asha Partners

To eliminate poverty through the creation of sustainable and effective community development projects, and to create holistic transformation by bringing hope, empowerment, and healing to those with the greatest need.

Religion
5
Heart for Africa Inc

The organization's primary mission is to provide an opportunity for north americans to bring hope to africans in the areas of hunger, orphans, poverty, and education.

Religion
6
Safe Water Network

Safe water network envisions a world with healthy, thriving communities managing their supply of safe water. our mission is to develop and scale-up innovative solutions, document best practices and build partnerships to reach millions with…

Environment
7
Fajr Scientific

To provide multi-specialty surgical care, humanitarian aid and educational support to people in low- and middle-income countries.

Science & Tech
8
Keralink International Inc

Keralink international works to end avoidable blindness by developing, delivering, and scaling affordable solutions for all, powered by innovative technology and partnerships.

Health
9
Commonwealth Care Alliance Inc

Commonwealth care alliance, inc.'s mission is to improve the health and well-being of people with significant needs by innovating, coordinating and providing the highest quality, individualized care.

Health
10
Global Partners in Care

The organization's mission is to build partnerships to enhance compassionate care globally. we are dedicated to improving access to hospice and palliative care worldwide.

International
11
Watsi Inc

Watsi, inc. is a san francisco-based non-profit organization that directly connects people through technology to fund life-changing healthcare for patients around the world. since launching in 2012, the organization has helped more than…

Health
12
Angiogenesis Foundation Inc

To improve global health by advancing angiogenesis-based medicine, diet, and lifestyle.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Waterorg; the most unlike its peers is American Heart Association 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

10 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. 10 of the 17 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
4/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY: $400,000 · OtherUTAH STATE UNIVERSITY+7 more: $7,730 · OtherWEST COAST SPORTS MEDICINE FOUNDATION: $15,000 · HealthAmerican Heart Association Inc: $10,500 · HealthST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $6,000 · HealthSEVA FOUNDATION: $6,000 · InternationalWATERORG: $3,500 · InternationalFULFILLMENT FUND: $5,000 · Human ServicesSewa International Inc: $500 · Human ServicesChild Hope International: $2,500 · Arts & CultureHARLEM BUSINESS ALLIANCE INC: $250 · Community Improvement
Other$407,730Health$31,500International$9,500Human Services$5,500Arts & Culture$2,500Community Improvement$250

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 budgetWEST COAST SPORTS MEDICINE FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $10,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $6,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetSEVA FOUNDATION: $6,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFULFILLMENT FUND: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWATERORG: $3,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetChild Hope International: $2,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCOMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP OF ORANGE COUNTY: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSewa International Inc: $500 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile Foundation
Amazonsmile FoundationWA2.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Chaudhari Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Chaudhari 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%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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 · 0–30%
    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 17 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Chaudhari 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