Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Mitul and Shilpa Mehta Medical 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.

$4k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$3k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Education$17kInternational$15kHealth$5kHousing & Shelter$1kPublic Safety & Disaster$1kReligion$1kScience & Tech$400
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$1,001
Median grant
1
States reached
$21k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SMITH CHASON SCHOOL OF NURSING$3,000
The Mitul and Shilpa Mehta Revocabl$1,001
CANYON VIEW ELEMENTARY PTA$251
02The need
03

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 50% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 10%Embry-Riddle Aerospace Summer Camp: $101 → 14%DOVER CLUB OF MIT: $1k → 8%Irvine Public School Foundation: $3k → 10%Claremont Gradute University: $2k → 14%Nasrien Ibrahim: $109 → 10%St Jeanne de Lestonnac: $400 → 14%UCI Anti Cancer Challenge: $50 → 10%SMITH CHASON SCHOOL OF NURSING: $6k → 14%Under the Same Sun: $2k → 10%SMITH CHASON SCHOOL OF NURSING: $3k → 14%The Mitul and Shilpa Mehta Revocabl: $1k → 10%SMITH CHASON SCHOOL OF NURSING: $1k → 14%CANYON VIEW ELEMENTARY PTA: $527 → 10%CANYON VIEW ELEMENTARY PTA: $468 → 10%CANYON VIEW ELEMENTARY PTA: $251 → 10%WOMEN FOR WORLD HEALTH: $2k → 10%Women for World Health: $757 → 10%OC Fire Authority: $1k → 10%ST JEANNE DE LESTONNAC FREE CLINIC: $500 → 10%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 9% of Mitul and Shilpa Mehta Medical Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 66% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 60% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

Mitul and Shilpa Mehta Medical Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 5.0% directed abroad (not shown)

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

35%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$14k · 3 repeat orgs$26k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +614% since the first grant, against +76% for the ones you funded once.

3 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
16

Total granted

$14k
$25k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+614%
+76%

Still filing today

33%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 76% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k 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
EducationHuman ServicesPhilanthropyInternationalOther

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

  • SC
    SMITH CHASON SCHOOL OF NURSING
    3× · 2023–2025 · $10k
  • WF
    WOMEN FOR WORLD HEALTH INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $3k · revenue +614%
  • CV
    CANYON VIEW ELEMENTARY PTA
    3× · 2023–2025 · $1k

Funded once

  • SI
    Sewa International Inc
    one grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue -83%
  • IP
    IRVINE PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $3k · revenue +87%
  • SV
    STANDING VOICE MEDICAL MISSION
    one grant, 2018 · $2k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field
05the grantee network

7 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 7 of the 20 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
4/7
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

SMITH CHASON SCHOOL OF NURSING — $10,000 · OtherSMITH CHASON SCHOOL OF NURSINGSTANDING VOICE MEDICAL MISSION — $2,000 · OtherSTANDING VOICE MEDICAL MISSIONUnder the Same Sun — $2,000 · OtherUnder the Same SunCANYON VIEW ELEMENTARY PTA — $1,246 · OtherCANYON VIEW ELEMENTARY PTAThe Mitul and Shilpa Mehta Revocabl — $1,001 · OtherDOVER CLUB OF MIT INC — $1,001 · OtherIndividual grant recipient — $1,001 · OtherIndividual grant recipient — $1,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient — $1,000 · Other+6 more — $1,960 · Other+6 moreSewa International Inc — $10,001 · Human ServicesSewa International IncIRVINE PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION — $3,067 · PhilanthropyWOMEN FOR WORLD HEALTH INC — $2,564 · InternationalClaremont Graduate University — $2,000 · EducationEMBRY-RIDDLE AERONAUTICAL UNIVERSITY INC — $101 · Education
Other$22,209Human Services$10,001Philanthropy$3,067International$2,564Education$2,101

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetSewa International Inc — $10,001 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetIRVINE PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION — $3,067 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetClaremont Graduate University — $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDOVER CLUB OF MIT INC — $1,001 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetLESTONNAC FREE CLINIC — $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEMBRY-RIDDLE AERONAUTICAL UNIVERSITY INC — $101 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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 Sewa International Inc
  • Who funds IRVINE PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION
  • Who funds WOMEN FOR WORLD HEALTH INC
  • Who funds Claremont Graduate University
  • Who funds DOVER CLUB OF MIT INC
  • Who funds LESTONNAC FREE CLINIC
  • Who funds EMBRY-RIDDLE AERONAUTICAL UNIVERSITY INC

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization Mitul and Shilpa Mehta Medical 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 3%
  • Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Inc3% of 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 · 0–15%
typical government reliance, FY2025

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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Mitul and Shilpa Mehta Medical Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Mitul and Shilpa Mehta Medical Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 20 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph