· Private foundation
Radha Devi Joshi Family Foundation Inc
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.
Read this first · the figures below need context
68% of Radha Devi Joshi Family Foundation Inc’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 1 organization directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2019, the last year Radha Devi Joshi Family Foundation Inc named its own grantees at scale: 10 organizations, $89k. 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 FY2018–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2019
- Under $10k31 grants · $39k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| EKAL VIDYALAYA FOUNDATION | $50,050 |
| MARCH OF DIMES | $9,000 |
| HINDU SOCIETY OF NEF | $8,566 |
| Individual grant recipient | $6,000 |
| HINDU SOCIETY OF NEF | $3,000 |
| PARALYZED VETERANS OF AMERICA | $1,101 |
| HINDU SOCIETY OF NEF | $1,001 |
| MARCH OF DIMES | $1,000 |
| HINDU SOCIETY OF NEF | $1,000 |
| PARALYZED VETERANS OF AMERICNA | $1,000 |
| FINCA | $1,000 |
| SHRINERS HOSPITAL FOR CHILDRENS | $1,000 |
| OXFAM AMERICA | $1,000 |
| HINDU SOCIETY OF NEF | $501 |
| HINDU SOCIETY OF NEF | $501 |
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 (FY18–18, $70) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 25% of Radha Devi Joshi Family Foundation Inc’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, 12% of the giving stays in FL; read by stated purpose it is 5% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
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.
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.
19 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2019, 9 since wound down; 22 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call). Read against FY2019, 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 FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
Save The Children Federation Inc2× · 2018–2021 · $12k · revenue +11%- FIFINCA INTERNATIONAL INC3× · 2018–2020 · $2k · revenue +31%
- OSOPERATION SMILE INC2× · 2018–2020 · $1k · revenue +37%
Funded once
- PPPAWS PURPLE HEARTSone grant, 2018 · $4k
MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INCgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $1k · revenue +89%- SPSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INCone grant, 2018 · $1k · revenue +23%
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.
(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.
We save children's lives by transforming pediatric heart care in underserved parts of the world.
Americares mission is to help people and communities around the world access (see schedule o).
To save lives and protect people's health by increasing equitable and sustainable use of vaccines.
To conduct and support programs and activities aimed at solving some of the world's greatest public health challenges, with a specific focus on enabling health workers to have the greatest possible impact on the health of the people they…
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
Our mission is to break down barriers to als research to find effective treatments. by uniting academia, the pharma and biotech industry, government, venture capital, related nonprofits, and the als community, we aim to overcome the…
The mission of the global alliance for improved nutrition (gain) is to improve the consumption of healthier diets for all, especially the most vulnerable, by improving the availability, affordability, desirability, and sustainability of…
2025 was a turbulent year for the medical and health research community, but our commitment to advocating for science never wavered. from pushing back against funding threats to elevating researchers' voices and equipping advocates, we…
Usp's mission is to improve global health through public standards and related programs that help ensure the quality, safety, and benefit of medicines and foods.
For over 20 years, chai's mission has been to save lives and improve health outcomes in low-and middle-income countries around the world. we do this by enabling the government and private sector to strengthen and sustain quality health…
To discover, develop and deliver safe, effective and affordable vaccines for global public health. its vision is developing countries free of suffering from infectious disease.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is March of Dimes Inc and the most unlike its peers is Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 53 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 26% 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 15% 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.
26 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. 26 of the 55 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 VANGUARD CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT PROGRAM ↗
- Who funds MARCH OF DIMES INC ↗
- Who funds Save The Children Federation Inc ↗
- Who funds PARALYZED VETERANS OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds THE SHRINERS' HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN ↗
- Who funds Leadership Institute ↗
- Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC ↗
- Who funds FINCA INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds OPERATION SMILE INC ↗
- Who funds SPECIAL OLYMPICS FLORIDA Inc ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds OXFAM-AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds ACCESS LIFE AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds SMILE TRAIN INC ↗
- Who funds PROJECT ORBIS INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds FEED THE CHILDREN INC ↗
- Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
- Who funds FLORIDA SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Radha Devi Joshi Family Foundation Inc 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.
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- The Shriners' Hospital for Children — 6% of income from government
- Florida Sheriffs Association Inc — 4% of income from government
- Feed the Children Inc — 1% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 0% of income from government
- Oxfam-America Inc — 0% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Radha Devi Joshi Family Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Radha Devi Joshi Family Foundation Inc 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.