· Private foundation
Guru Krupa Foundation Inc Attn Mukund Padmanabahan
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 52% of GURU KRUPA FOUNDATION INC ATTN MUKUND PADMANABAHAN’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 $10k1 grant · $10k
- $10k–50k66 grants · $1.6M
- $50k–250k23 grants · $1.7M
- $250k+3 grants · $750k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UCLA FOUNDATION | $250,000 |
| UCLA FOUNDATION | $250,000 |
| UCLA FOUNDATION | $250,000 |
| SRI RANGANATHA PADUKA VIDYALAYA TRUST | $225,000 |
| SRI PRATYAKSHA CHARITABLE TRUST | $150,000 |
| WIKI EDUCATION FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| SAMSKRITA BHARATI | $100,000 |
| IIT KHARAGPUR FOUNDATION | $81,000 |
| RELIGION NEWS FOUNDATION | $75,000 |
| LITERACY NASSAU | $75,000 |
| ST NICKS ALLIANCE | $75,000 |
| CITY PARKS FOUNDATION | $70,000 |
| ACTION FOR INDIA | $60,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $60,000 |
| REACH OUT AND READ OF GREATER NY | $60,000 |
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 US giving — 70% of grant dollars ($18M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 30% that went abroad ($7.7M) is mapped below.
Your human-services grants (FY20–25, $902k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 92% 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
Beyond the US — 30% of all-years giving ($7.7M)
1 country, by the recipient’s country on the filing.
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 35% of Guru Krupa Foundation Inc Attn Mukund Padmanabahan’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. Read by recipient address, 26% of the giving stays in NY; read by stated purpose it is 23% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +41% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
101 repeat relationships — 71 still active in FY2025, 30 since wound down; 18 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, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $390k 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
- CSCOLD SPRING HARBOR LABORATORY4× · 2021–2024 · $1.0M · revenue +15%
- SBSTONY BROOK FOUNDATION INC2× · 2020–2023 · $500k · revenue +273%
- SNST NICKS ALLIANCE CORPORATION7× · 2019–2025 · $425k · revenue +66%
Funded once
- IFIITKGP FOUNDATIONone grant, 2020 · $125k · revenue -36%
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2020 · $65k
- EVEKAL VIDYALAYA FOUNDATION OF USAone grant, 2019 · $52k
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.
Public education
Us-india policy institute (usipi)undertaking policy research on diversity and inclusive developments in india and the usa. usipis vision for equal access to freedom,justice, and opportunity in india rests on its three pillars; research &…
PRATHAM USA'S PRIMARY OBJECTIVES ARE (i) raising funds to support learning, (ii) increasing awareness about the challenges facing students and equitable approaches to improving learning outcomes at scale, (CONTINUED ON SCHEDULE O)
Scale PlanetReads Same Language Subtitling SLS innovation on mainstream entertainment content on TV and streaming in all languages for three purposes: 1 reading literacy 2 media access and 3 language learning driven by a strategy for…
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…
Improve the social and economic conditions of the economically weaker and underprivileged sections of society in India; and improve the literacy rate in villages in India by imparting elementary education to children in these villages
Transforming lives of underprivileged children through education, technology, healthcare programs, and connection with a global network of qualified volunteers and mentors.
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…
Room to read envisions a world free from illiteracy and gender inequality, where all children have room to read, learn and grow.
Nanban foundation strives to provide free, high-quality financial education for all. the organization functions with the support of volunteers united by one common goal: knowledge sharing. embracing online education, we invite people of…
The specific purpose, mission, and activity of the corporation is to secure funding for promoting education, research, technology development, startup incubation, acceleration, and translational research at the indian institute of science…
The very essence of spirituality and religion lies in understanding the depth of ancient wisdom, connecting to the divine, and achieving inner peace. our organization, rooted in the profound teachings of vedic scriptures and the practice…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Book Fairies Inc and the most unlike its peers is Sacramento Mahaperiyavaa Mandali. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 25 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
59 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. 59 of the 155 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 UCLA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds COLD SPRING HARBOR LABORATORY ↗
- Who funds STONY BROOK FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Children International ↗
- Who funds ST NICKS ALLIANCE CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds LITERACY NASSAU INC ↗
- Who funds SAMSKRITA BHARTI ↗
- Who funds EKAL VIDYALAYA FOUNDATION OF USA ↗
- Who funds SOUTH ASIAN COUNCIL FOR SOCIAL SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds REACHING OUT COMMUNITY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds ALL INDIA MOVEMENT FOR SEVA INC ↗
- Who funds AKSHAYA PATRA FOUNDATION (USA) ↗
- Who funds LONG ISLAND CHILDREN'S MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds CITY PARKS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds FIRST BOOK ↗
- Who funds RELIGION NEWS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WIKI EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LOTUS OUTREACH ↗
- Who funds BEHIND THE BOOK INC ↗
- Who funds SIMONS LAUFER MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds IITKGP FOUNDATION ↗
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: Globalgiving Foundation Inc · Bright Funds Foundation · The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · American Express Foundation · The Hyde and Watson Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The New York Community Trust · Mother Cabrini Health Foundation Inc · Investors Foundation Inc · Nora Roberts Foundation · Salesforce Foundation · Pine Tree Foundation of New York
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 Guru Krupa Foundation Inc Attn Mukund Padmanabahan 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.
- Wellesley College — 1% 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.