Skip to content
Karande Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Karande 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.

$29k
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$28k
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, FY2017 to 2024.

Education$249kInternational$40kPublic Safety & Disaster$19kReligion$13kCommunity Improvement$13kPhilanthropy$7kHuman Services$6kHealth$5kOther$0
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $1k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $28k
$500
Median grant
2
States reached
$2.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PRATHAM USA$27,500
2025 HOUSTON MARATHON$500
TEXAS GAUSHALA$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 (FY21–21, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%DAYA FOUNDATION: $5k → 12%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

NY
MA
OR
CT
CA
GA
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.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$318k · 9 repeat orgs$43k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
19

Total granted

$318k
$42k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+39%
+48%

Still filing today

67%
32%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k 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
InternationalHuman ServicesPhilanthropyPublic Safety & DisasterCommunity ImprovementFood & NutritionOther
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

  • PU
    PRATHAM USA
    8× · 2017–2024 · $238k · revenue +20%
  • CR
    CRY-CHILD RIGHTS AND YOU AMERICA INC
    4× · 2018–2023 · $20k · revenue +72%
  • DI
    Daya Inc
    2× · 2019–2020 · $13k · revenue +302%

Funded once

  • EV
    EKAL VIDLAYA FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2023 · $5k
  • AN
    AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS
    one grant, 2023 · $5k
  • DF
    DAYA FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2023 · $5k
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
Friends of Teach for India Inc

Empowering mobilizers like teach for india with intellectual, human, and financial resources to eliminate educational inequity in india.

Education
3
India Foundation

Healthcare and education for the needy

Human Services
4
Sampradaya Usa

Foster teachings of hindu religion

Religion
5
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
6
Shadhika Project

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…

—
7
Yoga Dana Foundation
Education
8
India Awareness Foundation Inc

Public education

Education
9
Development Data Lab Inc

DDL`s Work is designed to widen public access to and use of economic, demographic and physical data that describes, defines and seeks to alleviate poverty, especially in the developing world

International
10
Upaya Social Ventures

Upaya Social Ventures' mission is to create dignified jobs for people living in extreme poverty by building scalable businesses with investment and consulting support.

International
11
Akhand Jyoti Usa

Eradicate cureable blindness, girls education, and women empowerment in the rural india

Health
12
Educate Girls

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…

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The American India Foundation; the most unlike its peers is VedicTree 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

13 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. 13 of the 30 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
10/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PRATHAM USA: $238,113 · PhilanthropyPRATHAM USAAMERICAN RED CROSS: $14,000 · OtherAMERICAN RED CRO…EKAL VIDLAYA FOUNDATION: $5,000 · OtherEKAL VIDLAYA FOU…AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS: $5,000 · OtherAMERICAN NATIONA…DAYA FOUNDATION: $5,000 · OtherDAYA FOUNDATIONIndividual grant recipient: $4,600 · OtherIndividual grant…SUJNANA RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $4,000 · OtherSUJNANA RELIGIOU…INKSHARES: $3,206 · OtherINKSHARESSRI SATYANARANA SWAMY TEMPLE: $2,501 · OtherCRY AMERICA: $2,500 · Other+11 more: $7,550 · Other+11 moreCRY-CHILD RIGHTS AND YOU AMERICA INC: $20,000 · InternationalCRY-CHILD RIG…EKAL VIDYALAYA FOUNDATION OF USA: $10,137 · InternationalEKAL VIDYALAY…Asha for Education: $7,500 · InternationalAsha for Educ…BUILDON INC: $6,700 · InternationalBUILDON INCDaya Inc: $12,500 · Community ImprovementDAYA FOUNDATION: $5,000 · Human ServicesACCESS LIFE AMERICA INC: $1,000 · Human ServicesTHE AMERICAN INDIA FOUNDATION: $5,000 · Public Safety & DisasterVedicTree Foundation: $1,000 · Food & Nutrition
Philanthropy$238,113Other$53,357International$44,337Community Improvement$12,500Human Services$6,000Public Safety & Disaster$5,000Food & Nutrition$1,000

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 budgetPRATHAM USA: $238,113 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetCRY-CHILD RIGHTS AND YOU AMERICA INC: $20,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetDaya Inc: $12,500 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetEKAL VIDYALAYA FOUNDATION OF USA: $10,137 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetBUILDON INC: $6,700 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetDAYA FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetTHE AMERICAN INDIA FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetACCESS LIFE AMERICA INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetVedicTree Foundation: $1,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetKHAN ACADEMY INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHOUSTON TENNIS ASSOCIATION INC: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTexas Gaushala: $500 over 1y, 0.1% 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 PRATHAM USA ↗
  • Who funds CRY-CHILD RIGHTS AND YOU AMERICA INC ↗
  • Who funds Daya Inc ↗
  • Who funds EKAL VIDYALAYA FOUNDATION OF USA ↗
  • Who funds Asha for Education ↗
  • Who funds BUILDON INC ↗
  • Who funds DAYA FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE AMERICAN INDIA FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds ACCESS LIFE AMERICA INC ↗
  • Who funds VedicTree Foundation ↗
  • Who funds KHAN ACADEMY INC ↗
  • Who funds HOUSTON TENNIS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Texas Gaushala ↗

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 Blackbaud Giving …Shell USA Company Fou…Charities Aid Foundat…Network for GoodPaypal Charitable Giv…American Online Givin…The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Blackbaud Giving FundSC12.5× affinity6 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Shell USA Company Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America · Network for Good · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 Karande Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Karande Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get 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 · 0–50%
    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 30 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 Karande’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