· Private foundation
Mani Charitable Foundation
Its FY2023 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
Read this first · the figures below need context
100% of Mani Charitable Foundation’s FY2023 grant dollars went to Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2023 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2021, the last year Mani Charitable Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 9 organizations, $105k. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2023.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2021
- Under $10k7 grants · $20k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $85k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| BUILDING CHANGES | $25,000 |
| YWCA SEATTLE KING SNOHOMISH COUNTY | $25,000 |
| INDIAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY SERVICES | $15,385 |
| THE SOPHIA WAY | $10,000 |
| CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY | $10,000 |
| BELLEVUE SCHOOLS FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| UNIVERISTY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION | $3,500 |
| ASHA FOR EDUCATION | $3,000 |
| NAMI EASTSIDE | $2,686 |
| PRATHAM USA | $2,570 |
| FEEDING AMERICA | $2,500 |
| AID INC | $500 |
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 human-services grants (FY17–21, $31k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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
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.
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 +93% since the first grant, against +46% for the ones you funded once.
13 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2021, 4 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call). Read against FY2021, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
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 FY2022, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k 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
- CUCHAPMAN UNIVERSITY4× · 2018–2021 · $90k · revenue +46%
- ACAPI CHAYA4× · 2017–2020 · $59k · revenue +196%
- IAINDIAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY SERVICES5× · 2017–2021 · $34k · revenue ×12
Funded once
- MPMaris Placegraduatedone grant, 2020 · $8k · revenue +80%
- TTasveergraduatedone grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +93%
- UOUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $5k · revenue +46%
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.
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…
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…
Our mission is to shift policies and systems to increasingly value and embed supports for caregiver and infant mental health in the places where families are during pregnancy and early childhood. perigee is organized & operated as a…
We take a joyful, community-oriented approach to raising engaged citizens, deep learners, and brave adventurers with the skills, creativity, and heart needed to better the world.
To provide multi-specialty surgical care, humanitarian aid and educational support to people in low- and middle-income countries.
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.
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
School's out washington (sowa) drives positive systemic change so that all washington's children and youth, particularly those furthest from justice, have access to a robust ecosystem of high-quality expanded learning programs.
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…
We conduct fundamental infectious disease research to generate critical new knowledge about pathogens and their interactions with see schedule o for continuationhumans to enable the discovery and development of novel interventions,…
The mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc and the most unlike its peers is Pratidhwani. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 24 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% 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.
36 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. 36 of the 44 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 FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND ↗
- Who funds CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds API CHAYA ↗
- Who funds INDIAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY SERVICES ↗
- Who funds BUILDING CHANGES ↗
- Who funds THE SOPHIA WAY ↗
- Who funds BELLEVUE SCHOOLS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds UPAYA SOCIAL VENTURES ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY PREPARATORY ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds PRATHAM USA ↗
- Who funds Maris Place ↗
- Who funds PLEDGELING FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Tasveer ↗
- Who funds Asha for Education ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PAYPAL CHARITABLE GIVING FUND ↗
- Who funds Feeding America ↗
- Who funds NAMI Eastside ↗
- Who funds HOPELINK ↗
- Who funds OVERLAKE SERVICE LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds COVENANT HOUSE ↗
- Who funds Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center ↗
- Who funds TREEHOUSE ↗
- Who funds NAMI National ↗
- Who funds HEDGEBROOK ↗
- Who funds ASSOCIATION FOR INDIAS DEVELOPMENT INC ↗
- Who funds Sai Parivar Foundation ↗
- Who funds King County Sexual Assault Resource Center ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC ↗
- Who funds Kiran Anjali Project ↗
- Who funds PRATIDHWANI ↗
- Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
- Who funds CROSS OUT CANCER ↗
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: Seattle Foundation · Puget Sound Energy Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Norcliffe Foundation · United Way of King County · Salesforce Foundation · Aven Foundation · Satya and Rao Remala Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Akila and S Somasegar Family Foundation · Naveen and Anu Jain Family Foundation · Overlake Medical Center & Clinics
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 Mani Charitable 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.
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.