Skip to content

· Private foundation

Nadindla Charitable Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$3k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$2k
Largest
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Religion$87kInternational$25kHuman Services$4kArts & Culture$2kPhilanthropy$500Education$500Health$360Housing & Shelter$360Other$0
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,785
Median grant
2
States reached
$6k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HINDU TEMPLE OF ST LOUIS$1,785
S3 FOUNDATION GAUSHALA$1,000
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 (FY21–24, $26k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 96% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%DHVANI FOUNDATION: $1k → 5%NRI VA: $25k → 11%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.

67%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$82k · 4 repeat orgs$39k to everyone else

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
13

Total granted

$82k
$38k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-6%
+41%

Still filing today

50%
46%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 64% 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
Arts & CultureHuman ServicesInternationalPhilanthropyPublic BenefitFood & 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

  • TH
    THE HINDU TEMPLE OF ST LOUIS
    6× · 2019–2025 · $76k
  • S
    SAWERAA
    3× · 2017–2022 · $2k · revenue -6%
  • DF
    DHVANI FOUNDATION
    2× · 2018–2021 · $2k · revenue +63%

Funded once

  • NI
    NRIVA INC
    one grant, 2024 · $25k · revenue -72%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2023 · $10k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $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
Samskrita Bharti

Promote samskritam as an everyday language and provide access to its rich and diverse repository of knowledge.

Arts & Culture
2
Ekatra Foundation

To preserve indic (south asian) literature.

Education
3
Vattikuti India Relief Foundation
Philanthropy
4
Telugu Literary and Cultural Association

Telugu literary and cultural association the association is a not for profit

Arts & Culture
5
Vedanta Charitable Foundation
Education
6
Svarupa Inc

Dedicated to the creation of a pioneering digital repository, and the digital transformation and equitable dissemination of knowledge, primarily drawing from the profound wisdom of ancient Sanskrit scriptures.

Religion
7
Satyagraha Foundation
Religion
8
Ekal Vidyalaya Foundation of Usa

To set up 100,000 one teacher school to provide free elementary education and free primary healthcare to children in remote and rural india

International
9
Sitare Foundation

Sitare foundation is an organization that will provide education to underprivileged children. a mind is a terrible thing to waste. sitare foundation believes that by giving the brightest children the best possible education, they will grow…

International
10
India Awareness Foundation Inc

Public education

Education
11
Sadvidya Foundation

Education

Religion
12
The India Center Foundation Inc

The india center is dedicated to the study of the indian subcontinent, the promotion of its cultural life, and the unique relationship between india and the united states. based in new york city, the india center hosts dialogues and…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Capital Research Center; the most unlike its peers is American Farmland Trust. 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

9 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. 9 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/9
Grantees still filing
4/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE HINDU TEMPLE OF ST LOUIS: $76,340 · OtherTHE HINDU TEMPLE OF ST LOUISIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+7 more: $3,186 · OtherNRIVA INC: $25,000 · Human ServicesNRIVA INCDHVANI FOUNDATION: $2,000 · Human ServicesDHVANI FOUNDATIONSAWERAA: $2,025 · Arts & CultureKUCHIPUDI ART ACADEMY INC: $1,450 · Arts & Culture+1 more: $100 · Arts & CultureFORTUNE FUND LTD: $500 · InternationalCAPITAL RESEARCH CENTER: $500 · PhilanthropyTAX FOUNDATION: $100 · Public BenefitAMERICAN FARMLAND TRUST: $100 · Food & Nutrition
Other$89,526Human Services$27,000Arts & Culture$3,575International$500Philanthropy$500Public Benefit$100Food & Nutrition$100

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNRIVA INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetSAWERAA: $2,025 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetDHVANI FOUNDATION: $2,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetKUCHIPUDI ART ACADEMY INC: $1,450 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetFORTUNE FUND LTD: $500 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetCAPITAL RESEARCH CENTER: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTAX FOUNDATION: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMEDIA RESEARCH CENTER: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FARMLAND TRUST: $100 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 NRIVA INC ↗
  • Who funds SAWERAA ↗
  • Who funds DHVANI FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds KUCHIPUDI ART ACADEMY INC ↗
  • Who funds FORTUNE FUND LTD ↗
  • Who funds CAPITAL RESEARCH CENTER ↗
  • Who funds TAX FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds MEDIA RESEARCH CENTER ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FARMLAND TRUST ↗

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.

Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA5.4× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

2023
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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 Nadindla’s filings →

    More from the funding graph