Skip to content
Juneja Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Juneja 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.

$3k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$2k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0188% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Education$11kHuman Services$6kHealth$2kSocial Science$2kFood & Nutrition$1kRecreation & Sports$1kReligion$961Arts & Culture$900Other$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$515
Median grant
1
States reached
$12k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Caring Hand For Children$1,975
Los Angeles Fire Department Foundat$515
Individual grant recipient$500
GoFundMe Inc$470
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 (FY18–25, $8k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Caring Hand For Children: $2k → 14%CARING HANDS FOR CHILDREN: $2k → 14%CARING HAND FOR CHILDREN: $1k → 14%CARING HAND FOR CHILDREN: $935 → 14%CARING HAND FOR CHILDREN: $935 → 14%CARING HAND FOR CHILDREN: $935 → 14%CARING HANDS FOR CHILDREN: $800 → 14%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.

71%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$21k · 4 repeat orgs$9k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +87% since the first grant, against +51% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
12

Total granted

$21k
$8k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+87%
+51%

Still filing today

50%
58%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 72% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $985 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
PhilanthropyHuman ServicesSocial ScienceHealthFood & NutritionYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • VE
    VIEWPOINT EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION
    3× · 2018–2020 · $11k · revenue +40%
  • CH
    CARING HAND FOR CHILDREN
    7× · 2018–2025 · $8k · revenue +87%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    3× · 2018–2025 · $2k

Funded once

  • VA
    VIJAY AMRITRAJ FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $2k · revenue +52%
  • GA
    GIVING AUSTIN LABOR SUPPORT
    one grant, 2024 · $1k · revenue 0%
  • K
    KETTO
    one grant, 2021 · $1k
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
Akshaya Patra Foundation (Usa)

The mission of the foundation is to simultaneously address childhood hunger and malnutrition and to promote education for children throughout india.

Food & Nutrition
2
Vsk Foundation

Vsk foundation seeks to identify and select qualified nonprofit organizaitons and equivalent projects, beginning in asia and in particular india, in need of additional charitable assistance.

International
3
Vidyadhara Foundation

Provide no cost education or facilitate by lending funds to other non profits and deserving students,teachers and schools in underserved communities to underserved and remote villages and locations where Governments cannot offer tuition or…

Education
4
Pratham International Inc

Pratham international was established to support learning innovations for children and youth in contexts across the globe. the organization facilitates the adaptation and dissemination of proven, scalable solutions, such as the…

International
5
Global Children Foundation Inc

To provide assistance to children around the world who need food, education and medical attention.

Human Services
6
Hands Giving Hope

The Organization provides worldwide relief and aid to reduce human suffering as a result of hunger, poverty, war and natural disasters.

Food & Nutrition
7
Aid for Starving Children

Aid For Starving Children provides assistance around the world to children and their families by providing food, shelter, clean water, financial assistance, education, and emergency relief to victims of famine, natural disasters, and war.

International
8
Give Foundation Inc

To increase overall charitable giving by creating a vibrant giving exchange

Human Services
9
Humanity for Children

Providing healthcare assistance to countries in africa

Philanthropy
10
Food for Hungry Minds

To support high performance educational initiatives for disadvantaged children around the world.

Education
11
Childrens Global Alliance

Provide assistance with orphanages and schooling.

Human Services
12
Foundation for International Medical Relief of Children

To provide healthcare access to children, families and communities internationally.

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Children's Hunger Project Inc; the most unlike its peers is International Global Charities. 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

12 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. 12 of the 18 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/12
Grantees still filing
8/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

VIEWPOINT EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $10,700 · OtherVIEWPOINT EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATIONIndividual grant recipient: $1,502 · OtherIndividual grant recipientKETTO: $1,000 · OtherKETTOCORONA-NORCO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRIC: $900 · OtherCORONA-NORCO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICSIMI VALLEY HINDU TEMPLE: $826 · OtherSIMI VALLEY HINDU TEMPLE+3 more: $319 · OtherCARING HAND FOR CHILDREN: $8,380 · Human ServicesCARING HAND FOR CHILDRENVIJAY AMRITRAJ FOUNDATION: $1,500 · Social ScienceInternational Global Charities: $500 · PhilanthropyGOFUNDMEORG: $470 · PhilanthropyTHE H4H FOUNDATION: $200 · PhilanthropyPRATHAM USA: $105 · PhilanthropyGIVING AUSTIN LABOR SUPPORT: $1,044 · HealthTHE TVRC EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 · Youth DevelopmentTHE CHILDREN'S HUNGER PROJECT INC: $1,000 · Food & NutritionLOS ANGELES FIRE DEPARTMENT FOUNDATION: $515 · Public Safety & Disaster
Other$15,247Human Services$8,380Social Science$1,500Philanthropy$1,275Health$1,044Youth Development$1,000Food & Nutrition$1,000Public Safety & Disaster$515

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 budgetVIEWPOINT EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $10,700 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCARING HAND FOR CHILDREN: $8,380 over 7y, 0.8% of budgetGIVING AUSTIN LABOR SUPPORT: $1,044 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE TVRC EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CHILDREN'S HUNGER PROJECT INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLOS ANGELES FIRE DEPARTMENT FOUNDATION: $515 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetInternational Global Charities: $500 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetGOFUNDMEORG: $470 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE H4H FOUNDATION: $200 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPRATHAM USA: $105 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR RESEARCH ON SCHIZOPHRENIA AND DEPRESSION: $25 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.

The Bank of America C…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Bank of America Charitable Foundation IncNC7.1× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 18 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 Juneja’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