Skip to content
Gurmehar Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Gurmehar 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.

$266k
Granted FY2024still arriving
14
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$75k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Health$505kReligion$501kCivil Rights$254kFood & Nutrition$183kEducation$156kHuman Services$147kArts & Culture$120kCrime & Legal$85kOther$0
02FY2024 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k3 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k9 grants · $130k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $126k
$10,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$1.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SANKARA EYE FOUNDATION$75,000
SIKH RESEARCH INSTITUTE$51,000
CYBER SIKG FOUNDATION$30,000
GLIDE FOUNDATION$20,000
ST ANTHONY FOUNDATION$15,000
JASWANT SAWHNEY TRUST$15,000
THE 1947 PARTITION ARCHIVE$10,000
SALDEF$10,000
ALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK$10,000
SIKH COALITION$10,000
PROJECT OPEN HAND$10,000
SACRAMENTO FOOD BANK$5,000
SF FOOD BANK$2,501
ST JUDE CHILDEREN'S RESEARCH HOSPIT$2,500
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 (FY18–23, $19k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%HUNGER AT HOME: $1k → 8%DASVANDH NETWORK: $12k → 8%DASVANDH NETWORK: $6k → 8%DASVANDH NETWORK: $1k → 8%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
MI
NY
NJ
CT
CA
KY
TN
DC
TX
FL
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.

85%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.7M · 21 repeat orgs$311k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +57% since the first grant, against +18% for those funded once.

21 repeat relationships: 13 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
19

Total granted

$1.7M
$309k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+57%
+18%

Still filing today

62%
42%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
ReligionCivil RightsArts & CultureFood & NutritionInternationalHuman ServicesOther
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

  • SE
    SANKARA EYE FOUNDATION USA
    8× · 2017–2024 · $497k · revenue +102%
  • SR
    Sikh Research Institute
    8× · 2017–2024 · $299k · revenue +166%
  • GF
    GLIDE FOUNDATION
    8× · 2017–2024 · $161k · revenue +51%

Funded once

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY
    one grant, 2022 · $150k
  • NP
    Nanak Prachar Sabha Inc
    one grant, 2022 · $50k · revenue -64%
  • CONNECTICUT PUBLIC BROADCASTING INC
    one grant, 2019 · $25k · revenue -9%
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
Sikh Information Centre

The Sikh Information Centre is based on Sikhi which stresses unity truth and creativity of a personal spiritual enlightenment The organization strives to develop evaluate and disseminate articles programs and social events at a local…

Human Services
2
Khalsa Foundation

Khalsa foundation california seeks to empower and advocate for the sikh and punjabi communities in the united states, fostering a sense of belonging and promoting holistic well-being through the sikh way of being. we strive to build a…

Religion
3
Sikh of America Corp

Provide to Children Religious ,Moral and Provide free food and Shelter

Health
4
Guru Gobind Singh Foundation Trust

Guru gobind singh foundation (ggsf) is a gurdwara that is a spiritual center an institution with a vision to create worldwide awareness regarding sikhs and sikhism. ggsfs mission has been to enhance the image of sikhs thru every possible…

Religion
5
Sikh Aid Usa

To support needy people of any religion worldwide

Religion
6
The Sikh Center Sf Bay Area

To promote the sikh religion.

—
7
Guru Nanak Study Circle

To build a sikh temple that cares about the community, bring spiritualism, peace around inland empire area and around the world. we intend to revive the true teachings of guru nanak dev ji, guru granth sahib ji and all guru sahaibans,…

Religion
8
Guru Nanak Mission Inc

To practice, promote and preach the principles of guru nanak dev ji's message of universal brotherhood as taught by the ten sikh gurus and sri guru granth sahib. the gurudwara sahib was formed to cater to the religious, social and cultural…

Religion
9
Guruji Sangat Northern California

To foster spitirual growth, unity and services to humanity through organizing satsangs,religious events and community programs

Religion
10
Nanak Naam

The organizations purpose is for the public benefit the advancement of the Sikh religion, primarily but not exclusively, in particular the ancient practice of meditation.

Religion
11
Sikh Council On Religion and Education Inc
Religion
12
Sindhi Association of North America
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Cyber Sikh Organization a Non-Profit California Public Benefit; the most unlike its peers is The 1947 Partition Archive. 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

21 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. 21 of the 41 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/21
Grantees still filing
17/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY: $150,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKYST ANTHONY FOUNDATION: $114,901 · OtherST ANTHONY FOUNDATIONKHALSA AID INTERNATIONAL: $90,000 · OtherKHALSA AID INTERNATIONALJASWANT SAWHNEY TRUST: $65,000 · OtherJASWANT SAWHNEY TRUSTIndividual grant recipient: $60,003 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCYBER SIKG FOUNDATION: $51,000 · OtherCYBER SIKG FOUNDATIONNanak Prachar Sabha Inc: $50,000 · OtherNanak Prachar Sabha IncTHE 1947 PARTINTION ARCH: $47,500 · OtherTHE 1947 PARTINTION ARCHALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $36,001 · Other+20 more: $123,629 · Other+20 moreSANKARA EYE FOUNDATION USA: $497,000 · HealthSANKARA EYE FOUNDATION USASikh Research Institute: $299,000 · ReligionSikh Research InstituteGLIDE FOUNDATION: $160,620 · ReligionGLIDE FOUNDATION+2 more: $2,002 · ReligionTHE SIKH COALITION: $93,501 · Civil RightsTHE SIKH …Sikh American Legal Defense & Education: $85,000 · Civil RightsSikh Amer…CONNECTICUT PUBLIC BROADCASTING INC: $25,000 · Arts & CultureTHE 1947 PARTITION ARCHIVE: $22,000 · Arts & CultureProject Open Hand: $35,181 · Food & NutritionCHRONICLE SEASON OF SHARING FUND: $10,000 · Food & NutritionTHE CYBER SIKH ORGANIZATION A NON-PROFIT CALIFORNIA PUBLIC BENEFIT: $25,000 · Education
Other$788,034Health$497,000Religion$461,622Civil Rights$178,501Arts & Culture$47,000Food & Nutrition$45,181Education$25,000

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 budgetSANKARA EYE FOUNDATION USA: $497,000 over 8y, 2.6% of budgetSikh Research Institute: $299,000 over 8y, 8.3% of budgetGLIDE FOUNDATION: $160,620 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetTHE SIKH COALITION: $93,501 over 8y, 0.7% of budgetSikh American Legal Defense & Education: $85,000 over 6y, 4.2% of budgetNanak Prachar Sabha Inc: $50,000 over 1y, 4.8% of budgetALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $36,001 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetProject Open Hand: $35,181 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CYBER SIKH ORGANIZATION A NON-PROFIT CALIFORNIA PUBLIC BENEFIT: $25,000 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetCONNECTICUT PUBLIC BROADCASTING INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE 1947 PARTITION ARCHIVE: $22,000 over 3y, 4.7% of budgetDASVANDH NETWORK: $18,251 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetSACRAMENTO FOOD BANK & FAMILY SERVICES: $15,051 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCHRONICLE SEASON OF SHARING FUND: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUnited Sikh Mission: $7,100 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO FOOD BANK: $5,002 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetDIVINE WILL FOUNDATION: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKHALSA CARE FOUNDATION: $1,001 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetASSOCIATION OF SIKH PROFESSIONALS: $1,001 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetKHALSA PEACE CORPS: $1,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetHUNGER AT HOME: $1,000 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.

  • Who funds SANKARA EYE FOUNDATION USA ↗
  • Who funds Sikh Research Institute ↗
  • Who funds GLIDE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE SIKH COALITION ↗
  • Who funds Sikh American Legal Defense & Education ↗
  • Who funds Nanak Prachar Sabha Inc ↗
  • Who funds ALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds Project Open Hand ↗
  • Who funds THE CYBER SIKH ORGANIZATION A NON-PROFIT CALIFORNIA PUBLIC BENEFIT ↗
  • Who funds CONNECTICUT PUBLIC BROADCASTING INC ↗
  • Who funds THE 1947 PARTITION ARCHIVE ↗
  • Who funds DASVANDH NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds SACRAMENTO FOOD BANK & FAMILY SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds CHRONICLE SEASON OF SHARING FUND ↗
  • Who funds United Sikh Mission ↗
  • Who funds SAN FRANCISCO FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds DIVINE WILL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds KHALSA CARE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds ASSOCIATION OF SIKH PROFESSIONALS ↗
  • Who funds KHALSA PEACE CORPS ↗
  • Who funds HUNGER AT HOME ↗

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.

Dasvandh NetworkBeyond Borders Founda…5Rivers FoundationS Kirpal Singh Family…Community Care Founda…Gs Donor Advised Phil…Raymond James Charita…American Online Givin…Charities Aid Foundat…Vanguard Charitable E…Morgan Stanley Global…Paypal Charitable Giv…
Dasvandh NetworkTX17.9× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Dasvandh Network · Beyond Borders Foundation Inc · 5Rivers Foundation · S Kirpal Singh Family Foundation Tr · Community Care Foundation Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 3%
  • Connecticut Public Broadcasting Inc: 3% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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 41 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 Gurmehar’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