Skip to content
Samta Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Samta Foundation

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.

$103k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
—
States reached
$103k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0186% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$108kEducation$13kArts & Culture$10kHousing & Shelter$7kHealth$6kInternational$4kEnvironment$3kAnimals$3kOther$0
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$103,000
Median grant
—
States reached
$182k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SHRIMAD RAJCHANDRA MISSION$103,000
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 (FY17–21, $1k) 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: $1k → 14%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $100 → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

NY
MA
CT
CA
CO
NE
VA
KS
DC
TX
FL
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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.2M · 24 repeat orgs$33k to everyone else

24 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 23 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

24
23

Total granted

$1.2M
$33k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+46%
+68%

Still filing today

46%
22%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
EnvironmentPhilanthropyAnimalsHuman ServicesRecreation & SportsInternationalOther
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

  • PU
    PRATHAM USA
    4× · 2017–2021 · $9k · revenue +20%
  • AN
    American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches
    4× · 2017–2021 · $2k · revenue +46%
  • GP
    GOD PROVIDES MINISTRY
    2× · 2020–2021 · $1k · revenue +32%

Funded once

  • DJ
    DBVI- JJ111
    one grant, 2018 · $10k
  • MD
    MATT DANGEL'S HOUSE
    one grant, 2023 · $6k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $3k
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
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
2
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
3
Resource Renewal Institute

The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.

Environment
4
African Wildlife Foundation Inc

Awf's mission is to ensure wildlife and wild lands thrive in modern africa. we work to equip african governments, institutions, business, and communities with the tools, insights, and support they need to define, own, and realize a…

Animals
5
Nia Tero Foundation

Nia tero works alongside indigenous peoples to secure their guardianship of vital ecosystems. indigenous peoples are guardians of earth.(see schedule o)

Environment
6
Wild Landscapes Inc

Wild landscapes, inc. (wli) is dedicated to conserving large and connected landscapes globally significant to wildlife and crucial to local communities. our environmental conservation strategy is to empower communities, conservationists,…

Animals
7
Denver Zoological Foundation

Inspiring communities to save wildlife for future generations.

Animals
8
Natural Resources Defense Council Inc

We safeguard the earth: its people, its plants and animals, and (see schedule o) the natural systems on which all life depends. we work to restore the integrity of the elements that sustain life - air, land, and water - to defend…

Environment
9
American Farmland Trust

Saves the land that sustains us by protecting farmland, promoting sound farming practices, and keeping farmers on the land.

Food & Nutrition
10
Property and Environment Research Center

Perc is dedicated to advancing conservation through markets, incentives, property rights, and partnerships.

Public Benefit
11
Northern Jaguar Project

The mission of the northern jaguar project is to preserve and recover the world's northermost population of the jaguar, its unique natural habitat, and native wildlife under its protection as a flagship, keystone, and umbrella species.

Animals
12
National Environmental Education and Training Foundation Inc

The national environmental education and training foundation, doing business as neef, is the nation's leading organization in lifelong environmental learning, creating opportunities for people to experience and learn about the environment…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Park Foundation; the most unlike its peers is God Provides Ministry. 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

17 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. 17 of the 47 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)
16/17
Grantees still filing
13/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DBVI: $1,061,000 · OtherDBVISHRIMAD RAJCHANDRA MISSION: $103,250 · OtherSHRIMAD RAJCHANDRA MISSION+36 more: $60,625 · OtherPRATHAM USA: $9,000 · PhilanthropyTHE H4H FOUNDATION: $2,500 · PhilanthropyAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $2,225 · Human ServicesGOD PROVIDES MINISTRY: $1,000 · Food & NutritionYOSEMITE FOUNDATION: $650 · Recreation & SportsUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $600 · InternationalNATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION: $320 · EnvironmentNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $100 · EnvironmentWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $100 · Environment
Other$1,224,875Philanthropy$11,500Human Services$2,225Food & Nutrition$1,000Recreation & Sports$650International$600Environment$520

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPRATHAM USA: $9,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE H4H FOUNDATION: $2,500 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $2,225 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetAVIELLE FOUNDATION INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGOD PROVIDES MINISTRY: $1,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetYOSEMITE FOUNDATION: $650 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $600 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION: $550 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetHOMES FOR OUR TROOPS INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSIERRA CLUB: $400 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION: $320 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetGREENPEACE INC: $300 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetDefenders of Wildlife: $225 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $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 PRATHAM USA ↗
  • Who funds THE H4H FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
  • Who funds AVIELLE FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds GOD PROVIDES MINISTRY ↗
  • Who funds YOSEMITE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds HOMES FOR OUR TROOPS INC ↗
  • Who funds BIDADA INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SIERRA CLUB ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds GREENPEACE INC ↗
  • Who funds Defenders of Wildlife ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION ↗

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Fidelity Investments …
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA4.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Samta Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Samta Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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 47 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 Samta’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home