Skip to content

· Private foundation

Rajiv & Caroline Shah Charitable 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.

$14k
Granted FY2024still arriving
10
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$4k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Health$55kPublic Safety & Disaster$21kFood & Nutrition$20kEducation$15kReligion$12kYouth Development$12kEmployment$5kScience & Tech$4kOther$0
02FY2024 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$253k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FEEDING AMERICA$4,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AM$2,500
SRI PANCHAMUKLHA HANUMAN TEMPLE$1,001
THE LIFE GROUP LA$1,000
RANCHO SAN ANTONIO BOYS TOWN$1,000
AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY$1,000
AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION$1,000
UNITED WAY GREATER LOS ANGELES$1,000
AMERICAN RED CROSS LOS ANGELES$1,000
PENINSULA EDUCATION FOUNDATION$500
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 (FY17–17, $4k) 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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $4k → 14%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.
04

Where the work is directed

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

About 9% of Rajiv & Caroline Shah Charitable Foundation Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 57% of the giving stays in CA; by stated purpose, 49%.

Rajiv & Caroline Shah Charitable Foundation Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
$138k · 14 repeat orgs$9k to everyone else

14 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
3

Total granted

$138k
$7k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+6%
+46%

Still filing today

64%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthFood & NutritionEducationEmploymentHuman ServicesPhilanthropyOther
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

  • Feeding America
    5× · 2020–2024 · $20k · revenue +40%
  • PV
    PALOS VERDES PENINSULA EDUCATION FOUNDATION
    8× · 2017–2024 · $15k · revenue +6%
  • PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC
    4× · 2018–2024 · $7k · revenue +50%

Funded once

  • AN
    American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branchesgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $4k · revenue +46%
  • P4
    PERSIANS 4 CURE
    one grant, 2017 · $2k · revenue -27%
  • TP
    TEAM PRIME TIME INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $1k · revenue +411%
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
The Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Fdn Group

Susan g. komen 's mission is to save lives by meeting the most critical needs in our communities & investing in breakthrough research to prevent & cure breast cancer.

—
2
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc

The mission of dfci is to provide expert, compassionate, and equitable care to children, adults, and their families, while advancing the understanding, diagnosis, treatment, cure, and prevention of cancer and related diseases. we train new…

Health
3
The Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Foundation Inc

Susan g. komen has an unmatched, comprehensive 360-degree approach to fighting breast cancer across all fronts and supporting millions of people in the u.s. and in countries worldwide. we advocate for policies to protect patients, drive…

Health
4
Blood Cancer United Inc

Our mission is to cure leukemia, lymphoma, hodgkin's disease and myeloma, and improve the quality of life of patients and their families.

Health
5
Target Als Foundation Inc

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…

Education
6
American Lung Association

The american lung association's mission is to save lives by improving lung health and preventing lung disease. we do this through education, advocacy, and research.

Health
7
American Institute for Cancer Research

Aicr champions the latest and most authoritative scientific research from around the world on cancer prevention and survival through diet, weight and physical activity, so that we can help people make informed lifestyle choices to reduce…

Health
8
Targeting Resistance in Cancer Cooperative
Health
9
Lung Cancer Research Foundation

The mission of the lung cancer research foundation is to improve lung cancer outcomes by funding research for the prevention, diagnosis, treatment and cure of lung cancer.

Health
10
Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute

Sanford burnham prebys medical discovery institute's mission is to advance the biomedical sciences by cultivating the next generation of scientific leaders, providing meaningful opportunities for researchers of all backgrounds to learn,…

Health
11
The Heart Foundation

The heart foundation (thf) was created to save lives from heart disease by increasing awareness, educating the public, and supporting innovative research at smidt heart institute at cedars-sinai medical center in los angeles, california.…

Philanthropy
12
The Translational Genomics Research Institute

Please see schedule o

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc; the most unlike its peers is Persians 4 Cure. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

15 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 15 of the 19 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)
14/15
Grantees still filing
8/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

AMERICAN RED CROSS LOS ANGELES: $16,500 · OtherAMERICAN RED CROSS LOS ANGELESDR SUSAN LOVE RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $12,500 · OtherDR SUSAN LOVE RESEARCH FOUNDATIONSRI PANCHAMUKLHA HANUMAN TEMPLE: $12,007 · OtherSRI PANCHAMUKLHA HANUMAN TEMPLERANCHO SAN ANTONIO BOYS TOWN: $11,000 · OtherRANCHO SAN ANTONIO BOYS TOWNALFRED MANN FOUNDATION: $4,000 · OtherALFRED MANN FOUNDATIONTHE ALFRED E MANN FOUNDATION FOR SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH: $2,500 · Other+1 more: $1,000 · OtherTHE LIFE GROUP LA INC: $13,000 · HealthTHE LIFE GROUP LA INCAmerican Diabetes Association: $9,000 · HealthAmerican Diabetes AssociationPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $7,300 · HealthPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION …BREAKTHROUGH T1D: $6,500 · HealthBREAKTHROUGH T1DPERSIANS 4 CURE: $2,000 · Health+2 more: $2,000 · HealthFeeding America: $20,000 · Food & NutritionFeeding AmericaPALOS VERDES PENINSULA EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $15,000 · EducationPALOS VERDE…Working Wardrobes For A New Start: $5,000 · EmploymentUNITED WAY INC: $4,000 · PhilanthropyAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $4,000 · Human Services
Other$59,507Health$39,800Food & Nutrition$20,000Education$15,000Employment$5,000Philanthropy$4,000Human Services$4,000

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 budgetFeeding America: $20,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetPALOS VERDES PENINSULA EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetTHE LIFE GROUP LA INC: $13,000 over 8y, 2.9% of budgetDR SUSAN LOVE RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $12,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetAmerican Diabetes Association: $9,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $7,300 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetBREAKTHROUGH T1D: $6,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetWorking Wardrobes For A New Start: $5,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetUNITED WAY INC: $4,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $4,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ALFRED E MANN FOUNDATION FOR SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH: $2,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTEAM PRIME TIME INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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 Feeding America ↗
  • Who funds PALOS VERDES PENINSULA EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE LIFE GROUP LA INC ↗
  • Who funds DR SUSAN LOVE RESEARCH FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds American Diabetes Association ↗
  • Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
  • Who funds BREAKTHROUGH T1D ↗
  • Who funds Working Wardrobes For A New Start ↗
  • Who funds UNITED WAY INC ↗
  • Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
  • Who funds THE ALFRED E MANN FOUNDATION FOR SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ↗
  • Who funds PERSIANS 4 CURE ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds American Heart Association Inc ↗
  • Who funds TEAM PRIME TIME 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.

The Bank of America Charitable Foundation IncNC8.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Bank of America Charitable 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 Rajiv & Caroline Shah Charitable Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Rajiv & Caroline Shah Charitable Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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 · 0–10%
    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 19 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Rajiv & Caroline Shah’s filings →

    More from the funding graph