Skip to content
Ekta Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Ekta Foundation

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.

$90k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$90k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Science & Tech$626kEmployment$288kArts & Culture$113kPhilanthropy$93kEnvironment$50kEducation$18kInternational$8kHealth$1kOther$0
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$90,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$413k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HUDSON ALPHA FOUNDATION$90,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 95% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%EQUAL INNOVATION INSTITUTE: $10k → 8%SKOLL FOUNDATION: $3k → 8%FOUNDATION FOR PRADER-WILLI RESEARC: $250 → 14%RECODED CO: $210k → 17%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $1k → 14%MERIDIAN INTERNATIONAL: $5k → 14%HUDSON ALPHA FOUNDATION: $161k → 11%CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL: $50k → 7%RECODED CO: $78k → 17%MERIDIAN INTERNATIONAL CENTER: $5k → 14%HUDSON ALPHA FOUNDATION: $150k → 11%AMERICA GIVES INC: $11k → 17%ANERA: $3k → 14%HUDSON ALPHA FOUNDATION: $125k → 11%CLINTON FOUNDATION: $60k → 17%HUDSON ALPHA FOUNDATION: $100k → 11%OPEN FUTURE INSTITUTE: $46k → 17%HUDSON ALPHA FOUNDATION: $90k → 11%OPEN FUTURE INSTITUTE: $27k → 17%HUNTSVILLE COLLEGE PREPARATORY SCH: $8k → 11%OPEN FUTURE INSTITUTE: $25k → 17%OPEN FUTURE INSTITUTE: $15k → 17%CLINTON FOUNDATION: $10k → 17%CLINTON FOUNDATION: $8k → 17%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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.1M · 4 repeat orgs$96k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +68% since the first grant, against +43% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
11

Total granted

$1.1M
$96k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+68%
+43%

Still filing today

100%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthInternationalPhilanthropyEducationYouth DevelopmentArts & CultureOther
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

  • HF
    HUDSONALPHA FOUNDATION
    5× · 2021–2025 · $626k · revenue +2%
  • OF
    OPEN FUTURE INSTITUTE
    4× · 2019–2023 · $113k · revenue +164%
  • BH
    BILL HILLARY & CHELSEA CLINTON FOUNDATION
    3× · 2020–2022 · $78k · revenue +68%

Funded once

  • CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $50k · revenue +94%
  • AG
    AMERICA GIVES INC
    one grant, 2024 · $11k · revenue 0%
  • EI
    EQUAL INNOVATION INSTITUTE
    one grant, 2023 · $10k
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
Council On Foreign Relations Inc

The council on foreign relations (cfr) is an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher dedicated to being a resource for its members, government officials, business executives, journalists, educators and…

International
2
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
3
The Poptech Institute

Poptech's mission is to accelerate the positive impact of world-changing people, projects and ideas. founded in 1996 by bob metcalfe (inventor, ethernet) and john sculley (apple, pepsi), poptech originally provided a forum to critically…

Education
4
Climate Institute

The climate institute is organized for the purpose of educating the general public and policy makers as to the gravity of potential climate change, exploring the policy implications of the latest scientific findings on climate modelling…

Environment
5
Institute for Eastwest Studies Inc

Eastwest institute (ewi) works to reduce international conflict, addressing seemingly intractable problems that threaten world security and stability. (continued on schedule o)

—
6
Us - China Policy Foundation
—
7
Medtech Innovator

Medtech innovator organizes and runs a global competition and virtual accelerator for medical device, digital health, and diagnostic startup companies.

Education
8
World Learning Inc

Creating a more sustainable, peaceful, and just world through education, development, and exchange since 1932. as both an accredited academic institution and an international ngo, world learning, inc. offers the best of theory and practice…

International
9
Americas Society Inc

Americas society is an educational forum which presents programs in its public policy and cultural affairs departments.

International
10
Endeavor Global Inc (F/K/a the Endeavor Initiative Inc)

Endeavor is leading the high-impact entrepreneurship movement around the world.

International
11
Target Als Foundation Inc

Our mission is to break down barriers to als research to find effective treatments. by uniting academia, the pharma and biotech industry, government, venture capital, related nonprofits, and the als community, we aim to overcome the…

Education
12
George Hw Bush Foundation for Us-China Relations
International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Bill Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation; the most unlike its peers is The Skoll Foundation. 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

11 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. 11 of the 15 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)
11/11
Grantees still filing
7/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HUDSONALPHA FOUNDATION: $626,450 · EducationHUDSONALPHA FOUNDATIONRe Coded Co: $287,567 · Youth DevelopmentRe Coded CoOPEN FUTURE INSTITUTE: $113,000 · Arts & CultureOPEN FUTUR…BILL HILLARY & CHELSEA CLINTON FOUNDATION: $78,476 · Health+2 more: $1,250 · HealthCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION: $50,000 · EnvironmentEQUAL INNOVATION INSTITUTE: $10,000 · OtherHUNTSVILLE COLLEGE PREPARATORY SCH: $7,650 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $5,000 · Other+1 more: $500 · OtherAMERICA GIVES INC: $11,100 · PhilanthropyTHE SKOLL FOUNDATION: $3,480 · PhilanthropyMERIDIAN INTERNATIONAL CENTER: $5,000 · InternationalAMERICAN NEAR EAST REFUGEE AID: $2,500 · International
Education$626,450Youth Development$287,567Arts & Culture$113,000Health$79,726Environment$50,000Other$23,150Philanthropy$14,580International$7,500

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 budgetHUDSONALPHA FOUNDATION: $626,450 over 5y, 2.1% of budgetRe Coded Co: $287,567 over 2y, 6.2% of budgetOPEN FUTURE INSTITUTE: $113,000 over 4y, 8.4% of budgetBILL HILLARY & CHELSEA CLINTON FOUNDATION: $78,476 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICA GIVES INC: $11,100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMERIDIAN INTERNATIONAL CENTER: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN NEAR EAST REFUGEE AID: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR PRADER-WILLI RESEARCH INC: $250 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.

Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO7.1× affinity6 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Ekta Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ekta Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report 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.

    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 15 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Ekta’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