· Private foundation
Sarma Charitable 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2021–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k18 grants · $45k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $118k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $135k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| AMERICAN RED CROSS | $85,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $50,000 |
| VALERO ENERGY FOUNDATION | $38,000 |
| GUADALUPE REGIONAL MED FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS | $20,000 |
| TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY SAN ANTONIO | $15,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO | $10,000 |
| SPURS GIVE | $10,000 |
| SAN ANTONIO BOWL ASSN | $7,500 |
| ARBOR CIRCLE | $7,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,150 |
| TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY | $5,000 |
| ST MARY'S UNIVERISTY | $5,000 |
| SSFCU CHARITABLE FOUNDATION | $4,000 |
| OAK HILLS FOUNDATION | $2,746 |
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 (FY21–25, $109k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 80% 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.
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 14% of Sarma Charitable 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, 94% of the giving stays in TX; read by stated purpose it is 87% — 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +25% since the first grant, against +17% for the ones you funded once.
14 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 13 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
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 FY2025, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $90k 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
- HFHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF SAN ANTONIO INC3× · 2021–2024 · $243k · revenue +49%
- SGSPURS GIVE4× · 2021–2025 · $85k · revenue +401%
- GRGUADALUPE REGIONAL MEDICAL FOUNDATION4× · 2022–2025 · $58k · revenue +121%
Funded once
- HFHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF Lone grant, 2023 · $75k
- STSOUTH TEXAS FOOD BANKone grant, 2021 · $25k · revenue -28%
- STSOUTH TEXAS BLOOD & TISSUE CENTERone grant, 2021 · $25k · revenue -36%
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.
The mission of the san antonio medical foundation is to improvehealth care, advance biomedical science, and enhance communitywell-being by providing leadership & active stewardship of our landand other assets.
To provide a safe, caring, and temporary home away from home for the families of children receiving essential medical services in san antonio, texas.
The mission of greater:satx is to lead the developemnt and diversification of san antonio regional economy through the recruitment and expansion of qualify employers and job producing investments.
Operated exclusively for educational purposes specifically including to further educational activities at texas a& m university-central texas within the meaning of 501(c)(3).
The mission of the sa cancer council is to provide financial resources for patient assistance services and cancer research to support the mays cancer center, home to ut health san antonio md anderson.
Provide funding for charitable, literary, cultural, and educational endeavors.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is San Antonio Area Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Ian S Foundation. 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 35 years old; the field is 11. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 27% 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 18% 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.
29 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. 29 of the 69 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 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF SAN ANTONIO INC ↗
- Who funds SAN ANTONIO FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds SPURS GIVE ↗
- Who funds VALERO ENERGY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GUADALUPE REGIONAL MEDICAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SSFCU CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTH TEXAS FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds SOUTH TEXAS BLOOD & TISSUE CENTER ↗
- Who funds FEEDING SOUTH FLORIDA INC ↗
- Who funds THE ARBOR CIRCLE CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds St Mary's University ↗
- Who funds SAN ANTONIO AREA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SAN ANTONIO BOWL ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds San Antonio Report ↗
- Who funds THE PROSTHETIC FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds RONALD McDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES OF GREATER NORTH TEXAS INC ↗
- Who funds NORTHSIDE EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: San Antonio Area Foundation · Pryor Myra Stafford Char Tr F0030100 · Nancy Smith Hurd Foundation · Harvey E Najim Charitable Foundation · Methodist Healthcare Ministries of South Texas Inc · Greater Houston Community Foundation · San Antonio Area Foundation Group Return · The Dixie Starnes Wenger Foundation · St Luke's Lutheran Health Ministries Inc · Elizabeth Huth Coates Charitable Foundation of 1992 · Faye L & William L Cowden Charitable Foundation · Nustar Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Sarma Charitable 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Feeding South Florida Inc — 5% 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 Sarma Charitable Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Sarma Charitable 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.