Skip to content
Dasra at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· 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 it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2024.

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

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 5 grants below total $613,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $15,609,315 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $14,996,315 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized 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

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 (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 its 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
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

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

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. 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 sends the money.

About 12% of Dasra’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Dasralessmore 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.

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

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +226% since the first grant, against -6% for those 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
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

  • 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%
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
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Empower-the Emerging Markets Foundation; 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 grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2026, 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

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

Where the money sits, by cause and 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 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 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
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.

Globalgiving Foundati…Silicon Valley Commun…Gs Donor Advised Phil…National Philanthropi…American Online Givin…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
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

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 Dasra funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Dasra. 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%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 20%
  • Centre for Wildlife Studies Inc: 20% 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, 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 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 19 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 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 Dasra’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