· Private foundation
Dr Vedavathi & Lakshman Agadi Foundation Nfp
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.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 41% of DR VEDAVATHI & LAKSHMAN AGADI FOUNDATION NFP’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k12 grants · $16k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ISKCON | $25,000 |
| COMMIT 2 CHANGE | $5,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $3,001 |
| CHICAGO VASAVI ASSOCIATION | $2,501 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,000 |
| NO KID HUNGRY | $1,000 |
| FEED THE HUNGRY | $864 |
| UNICEF | $500 |
| SASHTI INC | $500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $300 |
| WORLD VISION | $300 |
| SHRI PATAN JAIN MANDAL | $250 |
| FOOD FOR THE POOR | $150 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $80k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 94% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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
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.
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.
13 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2025, 12 since wound down; 11 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $41k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- TDTRINITY DATTA YOGA CENTER3× · 2022–2024 · $77k · revenue +157%
Feeding America3× · 2020–2022 · $9k · revenue +40%- FIFINCA INTERNATIONAL INC2× · 2020–2022 · $4k · revenue +157%
Funded once
- DFDYC FOUNDATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $50k · revenue +211%
- SKSmt Kamala Sri Venkappa M Agadi Fouone grant, 2019 · $20k
- ITISKCON TEMPLE OF GREATER CHICAGOone grant, 2021 · $20k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
Contribute vitamins and essential nutrients to the poor and unnourished children plus nourish the poor pregnant mothers in South Asia. In addition has constructed 65 wells for supplying water to tribal people in India,serving 8540 families.
Missionary work in the nation of India
Sadananda is a registered non-profit in the USA with the objective of supporting the needy and underprivileged people in India. We have partnered with Anandam, A Public Charitable Trust in Chennai, that has been supporting several…
Intelehealth leverages open-source technology for Governments, NGOs and Hospitals to seamlessly connect 'hard to reach' populations with high quality primary healthcare. Health organizations all over the world have used our technology to…
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,…
The mission of the foundation is to simultaneously address childhood hunger and malnutrition and to promote education for children throughout india.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Food for the Poor Inc and the most unlike its peers is Dyc Foundation Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 36 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
21 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 21 of the 46 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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.
- Who funds TRINITY DATTA YOGA CENTER ↗
- Who funds NRIVA INC ↗
- Who funds DYC FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CHINMAYA MISSION CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds Feeding America ↗
- Who funds BHASKARA PRAKASHA ASHRAM ↗
- Who funds Indo-American Center ↗
- Who funds National Indo American Museum ↗
- Who funds COMMIT-2-CHANGE ↗
- Who funds FINCA INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds Save The Children Federation Inc ↗
- Who funds FOOD FOR THE POOR INC ↗
- Who funds VIDYARANYA KANNADA KUTA ↗
- Who funds SHARE OUR STRENGTH ↗
- Who funds PLAN INTERNATIONAL USA INC ↗
- Who funds LESEA GLOBAL FEED THE HUNGRY INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · AbbVie Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Charities Aid Foundation America · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Network for Good · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 Dr Vedavathi & Lakshman Agadi Foundation Nfp 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.
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Food for the Poor Inc — 0% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Dr Vedavathi & Lakshman Agadi Foundation Nfp?
Find your warmest path to Dr Vedavathi & Lakshman Agadi Foundation Nfp 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.