Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Dasra

DASRA is catalyzing the strategic philanthropy movement to ensure that a billion lives can thrive with dignity and equity.

$16M
Granted FY2024still arriving
5
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$275k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20182024.

International$1.2MYouth Development$250kCommunity Improvement$220kPublic Safety & Disaster$125kAnimals$100kEducation$70kEmployment$25kArts & Culture$10k
02FY2024 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 5 grants below total $613,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $15,609,315 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $14,996,315 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $38k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $300k
  • $250k+1 grant · $275k
$100,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$48M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
EMPOWER - THE EMERGING MARKETS FOUNDATION$275,000
SWATALEEM USA CORPORATION$150,000
THE GOONJ FOUNDATION$100,000
ADOLESCENT HEALTH CHAMPIONS INC$50,000
CHILDSIDE FOUNDATION (US)$38,000
02The need
03

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY19–21, $254k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%FRIENDS OF BAREFOOT COLLEGE INTERNATIONAL: $104k → 15%SAVELIFE FOUNDATION: $100k → 17%SAVELIFE FOUNDATION: $25k → 17%ANNIECANNONS INC: $25k → 10%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

Which US states your grants reach

IL
NY
CA
CO
VA
MD
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region — $16M on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

India$16M · 100% · 9 grants

Stated purpose: ACTIVATING PHILANTHROPY · ADOLESCENTS AND WOMEN LEADERSHIP · CATALYTIC PHILANTHROPY

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 12% of Dasra’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.

Dasralessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 17% directed abroad (not shown)

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 foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge
repeat funding

Who you back again

Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.

42%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$845k · 4 repeat orgs$1.2M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +226% since the first grant, against -6% for the ones you funded once.

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
11

Total granted

$845k
$649k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+226%
-6%

Still filing today

100%
91%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 14% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $525k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
InternationalHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementPhilanthropyAnimalsEducationOther

First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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

  • EG
    EDUCATE GIRLS GLOBALLY
    5× · 2018–2022 · $520k · revenue -84%
  • SF
    SAVELIFE FOUNDATION USA
    2× · 2020–2021 · $125k · revenue +226%
  • AH
    ADOLESCENT HEALTH CHAMPIONS INC
    2× · 2022–2024 · $100k · revenue ×11

Funded once

  • FO
    FRIENDS OF BAREFOOT COLLEGE INTERNATIONAL INC
    one grant, 2021 · $104k · revenue +7%
  • CM
    CREATIVE MILLION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $100k · revenue +800%
  • CF
    CENTRE FOR WILDLIFE STUDIES INC
    one grant, 2021 · $100k · revenue -19%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Educate Girls

Educate Girls promotes and protects the right of girls to a quality education and works by supporting partners in geographies where the need is greatest to mobilize communities, enroll girls into school and improve learning outcomes. Our…

International
2
Shadhika Project

Shadhika believes in a future where each person in India can choose their own path to meaning, purpose, and happiness. Through global philanthropy and in-country programming, Shadhika believes that education is the most effective vehicle…

3
Annapurna Global Foundation
Philanthropy
4
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
5
Worldupstart Impacts

We support institutions and governments worldwide to build entrepreneurial ecosystems that drive scientific and technological breakthroughs. we help transform groundbreaking research into real-world solutions that: advance women's health…

Community Improvement
6
International Youth Foundation

Iyf is a global ngo that prepares young people to be healthy, productive and engaged citizens.

International
7
Shebuilds Foundation

To accelerate social, economic, and environmental progress globally by equipping entrepreneurs, innovators, and change makers with the tools to scale their impact

Community Improvement
8
International Center for Research On Women

The international center for research for women (icrw) is a global research institute, with a mission to advance rights and opportunities for women, girls, and structurally excluded populations with actionable evidence and solutions.

International
9
The Global Hunger Project

The hunger project is working to create a world without hunger through women-centered, holistic development strategies that address the root causes of hunger and poverty. in 2025, it reached nearly 12.7 million people in over 10,000…

International
10
Global Glow
Youth Development
11
Direct Action for Women Now World-Wide Inc Formerly Indias Daughters Inc
Philanthropy
12
Her Next Steps
Human Services

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Empower-the Emerging Markets Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Childside Foundation. 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

18 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 20172026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 18 of the 19 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/18
Grantees still filing
9/18
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

EDUCATE GIRLS GLOBALLY — $520,000 · InternationalEDUCATE GIRLS GLOBALLYEMPOWER-THE EMERGING MARKETS FOUNDATION — $275,000 · InternationalEMPOWER-THE EMERGING MARKETS FOUNDATIONCHILDSIDE FOUNDATION — $100,000 · InternationalCHILDSIDE FOUNDATIONRED DOT FOUNDATION GLOBAL — $100,000 · InternationalRED DOT FOUNDATION GLOBALUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF — $73,985 · InternationalUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF+1 more — $6,000 · InternationalSAVELIFE FOUNDATION USA — $125,000 · Human ServicesSAVELIFE FOUND…FRIENDS OF BAREFOOT COLLEGE INTERNATIONAL INC — $104,000 · Human ServicesFRIENDS OF BAR…AnnieCannons Inc — $25,000 · Human ServicesAnnieCannons I…SWATALEEM USA CORPORATION — $150,000 · OtherSWATALEEM USA C…SAVE-LIFE FOUNDATION INC — $50,000 · OtherSAVE-LIFE FOUND…Milaan Foundation — $60,000 · OtherMilaan Foundati…THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY — $10,000 · OtherVIDEO VOLUNTEERS — $10,000 · OtherGOONJ FOUNDATION — $100,000 · Community ImprovementIDEOORG — $20,150 · Community ImprovementCREATIVE MILLION INC — $100,000 · PhilanthropyADOLESCENT HEALTH CHAMPIONS INC — $100,000 · Youth DevelopmentCENTRE FOR WILDLIFE STUDIES INC — $100,000 · Animals
International$1,074,985Human Services$254,000Other$280,000Community Improvement$120,150Philanthropy$100,000Youth Development$100,000Animals$100,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetEDUCATE GIRLS GLOBALLY — $520,000 over 5y, 19% of budgetEMPOWER-THE EMERGING MARKETS FOUNDATION — $275,000 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetSWATALEEM USA CORPORATION — $150,000 over 1y, 44% of budgetSAVELIFE FOUNDATION USA — $125,000 over 2y, 5.5% of budgetFRIENDS OF BAREFOOT COLLEGE INTERNATIONAL INC — $104,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetADOLESCENT HEALTH CHAMPIONS INC — $100,000 over 2y, 19% of budgetGOONJ FOUNDATION — $100,000 over 1y, 58% of budgetCHILDSIDE FOUNDATION — $100,000 over 2y, 98% of budgetCENTRE FOR WILDLIFE STUDIES INC — $100,000 over 1y, 9.7% of budgetRED DOT FOUNDATION GLOBAL — $100,000 over 1y, 44% of budgetUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF — $73,985 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMilaan Foundation — $60,000 over 1y, 23% of budgetAnnieCannons Inc — $25,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetIDEOORG — $20,150 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVIDEO VOLUNTEERS — $10,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetASHOKA — $6,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them

A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Globalgiving Foundation IncDC17× affinity6 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Globalgiving Foundation Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization Dasra funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 20%
  • Centre for Wildlife Studies Inc20% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
2report 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, FY2025

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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Dasra?

Find your warmest path to Dasra 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 19 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph