Skip to content

· Private foundation

Madhav Manav Sewa

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.

$6k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$2k
Largest
01What it funds
0168% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Philanthropy$35kArts & Culture$11kHousing & Shelter$5kAnimals$4kInternational$808Religion$725Food & Nutrition$540Education$365Other$0
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$271
Median grant
4
States reached
$48k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Chetna Foundation$2,190
The Sophia Way$1,763
Individual grant recipient$803
HINDU EDUCATION AND CULTURAL SOCIET$454
ISKCON$271
Oregon Humane Society$266
Individual grant recipient$251
LEUKEMIA AND LYMPHOMA SOCIETY$51
Akashvaani Foundation$51
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.

US giving: 66% of grant dollars ($65k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 35% that went abroad ($34k) is mapped below.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY21–25, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%The Sophia Way: $2k → 9%The Sophia Way: $2k → 9%The Sophia Way: $822 → 9%The Sophia Way: $583 → 9%The Sophia Way: $352 → 9%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.

Beyond the US: 35% of all-years giving ($34k)

1 country, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
Australia$34k · 5 grants
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$94k · 9 repeat orgs$6k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +70% since the first grant, against +26% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
10

Total granted

$94k
$5k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+70%
+26%

Still filing today

22%
70%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $776 went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesPhilanthropyAnimalsArts & CultureFood & NutritionInternationalOther
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

  • CF
    Chetna Foundation
    5× · 2021–2025 · $34k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    5× · 2021–2025 · $18k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    5× · 2021–2025 · $14k

Funded once

  • R
    Rasika
    one grant, 2023 · $2k
  • BA
    BEAVERTON ARTS FOUNDATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $1k · revenue +743%
  • AP
    AKSHAYA PATRA FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2023 · $606 · revenue +15%
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
Observer Research Foundation America

Organization mission the observer research foundation america orf america is an independent, non-partisan, and nonprofit organization in washington dc dedicated to addressing policy challenges facing the united states, india, and their…

International
2
Oregon Center for Public Policy

The oregon center for public policy's mission is to achieve economic justice for all oregonians through research, analysis, and advocacy. ocpp works to change policies that foster economic security and stability for all oregonians. we do…

Employment
3
Direct Action for Women Now World-Wide Inc Formerly Indias Daughters Inc
Philanthropy
4
Farmers Ending Hunger

The organization's mission is to increase the quantity of high quality food commodities donated to the oregon food bank network through a partnership of farmers, food processors, the oregon food bank network and the public.

Human Services
5
Annapurna Global Foundation
Philanthropy
6
Asha Partners

To eliminate poverty through the creation of sustainable and effective community development projects, and to create holistic transformation by bringing hope, empowerment, and healing to those with the greatest need.

Religion
7
Actionaid Usa

Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…

Social Science
8
Our Children Oregon

Our children oregon's mission is to be a voice and force for the common good for all oregon children, ensuring all children have the resources and opportunities they need to reach their full potential. we elevate data and the voices of…

Philanthropy
9
Management Sciences for Health Inc

(msh) saves lives and improves the health of the world's poorest (see schedule o) and most vulnerable people by closing the gap between knowledge and action in public health.

International
10
Health Poverty Action Usa

Health Poverty Action USA acts in solidarity with health workers, activists & communities worldwide to improve health & challenge the causes of poverty. We do this in 3 distinct ways: 1. We approach health as an issue of social justice. We…

International
11
Pathfinder International

Pathfinder expands access to sexual and reproductive health services, opening the door to opportunities for women and all individuals to thrive-economically, educationally, and civically. driven by our country-led leadership and local…

International
12
Womens Foundation of Oregon

Women's foundation of oregon supports communities, programs, and individuals that improve the lives and opportunities of women and girls. we do this through direct grants, research, and policy advocacy.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Oregon Food Bank; the most unlike its peers is Blood Cancer United Inc. 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

10 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. 10 of the 22 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
8/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Chetna Foundation: $34,325 · OtherChetna FoundationIndividual grant recipient: $17,524 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $13,793 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTransition Projects Willamette Cntr: $10,102 · OtherTransition Projects Willamette CntrIndividual grant recipient: $7,451 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+9 more: $4,637 · OtherTHE SOPHIA WAY: $5,289 · Human Services+1 more: $101 · Human ServicesOREGON HUMANE SOCIETY: $4,351 · AnimalsBEAVERTON ARTS FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 · Arts & CultureAKSHAYA PATRA FOUNDATION (USA): $606 · Food & NutritionGOFUNDMEORG: $157 · PhilanthropyCORD USA INC: $101 · InternationalBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $51 · Health
Other$87,832Human Services$5,390Animals$4,351Arts & Culture$1,000Food & Nutrition$606Philanthropy$157International$101Health$51

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 budgetTHE SOPHIA WAY: $5,289 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetOREGON HUMANE SOCIETY: $4,351 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetBEAVERTON ARTS FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAKSHAYA PATRA FOUNDATION (USA): $606 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOREGON FOOD BANK: $540 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGOFUNDMEORG: $157 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetASHA INTERNATIONAL: $150 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCORD USA INC: $101 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSewa International Inc: $101 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $51 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 THE SOPHIA WAY ↗
  • Who funds OREGON HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds BEAVERTON ARTS FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds AKSHAYA PATRA FOUNDATION (USA) ↗
  • Who funds OREGON FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds GOFUNDMEORG ↗
  • Who funds ASHA INTERNATIONAL ↗
  • Who funds CORD USA INC ↗
  • Who funds Sewa International Inc ↗
  • Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗

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.

American Online Giving Foundation IncDE7.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Madhav Manav Sewa funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Madhav Manav Sewa. 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%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →median 21%
  • Oregon Food Bank: 21% of income from government
  • Beaverton Arts Foundation Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
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 22 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 Madhav Manav Sewa’s filings →

More from the funding graph