· Private foundation
Indira 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k7 grants · $18k
- $10k–50k9 grants · $268k
- $50k–250k12 grants · $1.5M
- $250k+1 grant · $264k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CENTRAL SQUARE FOUNDATION | $263,850 |
| HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL | $242,643 |
| GRAMIN ADIWASI SAMAJ VIKAS SANSTHAN SAUSAR | $176,650 |
| PATH | $174,385 |
| PEOPLES ACTION FOR NATIONAL INTEGRATION | $131,085 |
| ROOM TO READ INDIA TRUST | $119,000 |
| PARIVAAR EDUCATION SOCIETY | $118,640 |
| MAKER BHAVAN FOUNDATION | $117,000 |
| BASIC HEALTH CARE SERVICES TRUST | $89,625 |
| AKSHAYA PATRA USA | $87,200 |
| NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH AND NEURO SCIENCES | $68,040 |
| SHRIMAD RAJCHANDRA LOVE AND CARE - USA INC | $66,900 |
| CENTER FOR EXCELLENCE IN EDUCATION | $61,000 |
| INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY GANDHINAGAR | $49,100 |
| AGA KHAN FOUNDATION | $41,520 |
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 — 68% of grant dollars ($7.5M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 32% that went abroad ($3.5M) is mapped below.
Your human-services grants (FY23–23, $501) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% 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 — 32% of all-years giving ($3.5M)
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.
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 +27% since the first grant, against +8% for the ones you funded once.
50 repeat relationships — 21 still active in FY2025, 29 since wound down; 8 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, 71% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $578k 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
- PFPROMYS FOUNDATION4× · 2018–2024 · $878k · revenue +28% · 56% of their budget
- MBMaker Bhavan Foundation6× · 2020–2025 · $494k · revenue ×18
- TNThe Nudge Foundation3× · 2018–2020 · $313k · revenue ×21 · 37% of their budget
Funded once
- IHIIT HYDERBAD FOUNDATIONone grant, 2019 · $300k
- RTROOM TO READone grant, 2022 · $126k
- ECEXCELLENCE CENTER FOR EXCELLENCE IN EDUCATIONone grant, 2022 · $77k
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.
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 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…
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…
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
Arihanta academys mission is to build a world-class online institution for deeper learning of the jain tradition, its principles, and how these principles apply to daily life for the benefit and well-being of individuals and society in…
As a leading research university with a distinctive commitment to undergraduate education, Rice University aspires to path breaking research, unsurpassed teaching, and contributions to the betterment of our world. It seeks to fulfill this…
To provide consciousness - based educational programs including post secondary educational programs.
The purpose of the corporation is to engage in such activity as may be necessary, appropriate or otherwise helpful to support, provide assistance to or perform functions of aravind eye hospital and postgraduate institute of ophthamology…
The specific purposes for which the Foundation is organized are to fund and promote overall betterment of Indian Institute Of Technology,Kanpur and its students,faculty and alumni body.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Akanksha Education Fund Inc and the most unlike its peers is Southern Asian Public Health Association. 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 22 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 — 0.0% 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.
52 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. 52 of the 94 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 PROMYS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds DAKSHANA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Maker Bhavan Foundation ↗
- Who funds AKANKSHA EDUCATION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds The Nudge Foundation ↗
- Who funds AKSHAYA PATRA FOUNDATION (USA) ↗
- Who funds EDUCATE GIRLS ↗
- Who funds PATH ↗
- Who funds Center for Excellence in Education ↗
- Who funds ROSEBAY MONTESSORI ↗
- Who funds Active Minds Inc ↗
- Who funds IIT Gandhinagar Foundation ↗
- Who funds THE GROUNDTRUTH PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds ST JUDE INDIA CHILDCARE CENTRES USA ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗
- Who funds SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds Arpan Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF TEACH FOR INDIA INC ↗
- Who funds IIT Bombay Heritage Foundation ↗
- Who funds SHRIMAD RAJCHANDRA LOVE AND CARE -USA INC ↗
- Who funds UC SAN DIEGO FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION FOR LEARNING EQUALITY INC ↗
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 Pfizer Foundation Inc · Verizon Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Impactassetsinc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The US Charitable Gift Trust · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc
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 Indira Foundation 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.
- Johns Hopkins University — 12% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% 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.