How much did Saxena Family Foundation grant in FY2024?

Food & Nutrition$605kEducation$346kPublic Safety & Disaster$200kHealth$76kPhilanthropy$75kPublic Benefit$53kHuman Services$51kRecreation & Sports$49kInternational$43kOther$795k

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2018

boston

2019

boston

2020

bostonakshaya patra

2021

—

2022

akshaya patra

2023

impact

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k4 grants · $6k
$10k–50k6 grants · $93k
$50k–250k1 grant · $50k

$10,000

Median grant

States reached

$10.0M

Total assets

Largest grants

SOUTH ASIAN IMPACT FOUNDATION$50,000
VISION-AID INCORPORATED$25,000
SAKHI FOR SOUTH ASIAN SURVIVORS INC$20,000
SPECIAL OLYMPICS MASSACHUSETTS INC$15,000
MAYHEW$12,500
DESAI FOUNDATION$10,000
FRIENDS OF TEACH FOR INDIA INC$10,000
SPECIAL OLYMPICS MASSACHUSETTS INC$3,750
THE ELLIE FUND$1,000
PAN-MASSACHUSETTS CHALLENGE INC$500
HOPKINTON YOUTH FIELD HOCKEY INC$251

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY22–23, $51k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14% — the area typically sits at 10%. 99% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; 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, United Way ALICE — 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 7% of Saxena Family 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.

Saxena Family Foundationlessmore of its giving

Placed by recipient address · 8.5% directed abroad (not shown)

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.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$2.0M · 17 repeat orgs$262k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +49% since the first grant, against +44% for the ones you funded once.

17 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2024, 12 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$2.0M

$188k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+49%

+44%

Still filing today

88%

80%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 50% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $74k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EducationInternationalArts & CulturePhilanthropyHuman ServicesPublic BenefitOther

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

AP
AKSHAYA PATRA FOUNDATION USA
6× · 2017–2022 · $605k · revenue +239%
IF
INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR SOCIAL IMPACT INC
5× · 2018–2023 · $300k · revenue +28%
AI
AMERICAN INDIA FOUNDATION
4× · 2017–2020 · $200k · revenue +113%

Funded once

VH
VISHWA HINDU PARISHAD OF AMERICAgraduated
one grant, 2023 · $100k · revenue +204%
TF
TIE-BOSTON FOUNDATION INC
one grant, 2019 · $25k · revenue -48%
S
SOHARA
one grant, 2017 · $20k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

Ink Global Foundation

Ink global foundation is on a mission to provide international exposure and necessary resources to the global innovators from india to accelerate their journey to success.

Youth Development

Iisc Foundation

The specific purpose, mission, and activity of the corporation is to secure funding for promoting education, research, technology development, startup incubation, acceleration, and translational research at the indian institute of science…

Education

Us-India Policy Institute

Us-india policy institute (usipi)undertaking policy research on diversity and inclusive developments in india and the usa. usipis vision for equal access to freedom,justice, and opportunity in india rests on its three pillars; research &…

Arts & Culture

Rhode Island Quality Institute

Improve health and health care by providing trusted data and information to enable the best health care in rhode island through connecting data.

Health

Mit International Inc

The corporation is organized and shall be operated exclusively for charitable, educational, and scientific purposes.

Education

Iit (Bhu) Foundation Inc

The foundation is a u.s. "friends of" entity formed by individuals who wish to advance and support the work of the indian institute of technology (banaras hindu university, "iit (bhu)"), a public technical and research university located…

Education

Sankara Eye Foundation Usa

Eradicating curable blindness in india through free surgeries and funded eye hospitals.

Health

Pan Iit Alumni Foundation Inc

The foundation will support charitable objectives including by funding international initiatives in education, Skill and entrepreneurship development, poverty relief, and technology-led interventions for impact, leveraging alumni from all…

International

Ashra Charitable Fund Inc

Conduct activities for the general benefit of persons of indian origin in us & in the world

International

Deshpande Foundation Inc

The Deshpande Foundation, Inc. encourages the use of entrepreneurship and innovation as catalysts for societal change and improved quality of life.

Philanthropy

The Desai Foundation

Education

India Youth Fund

India youth fund's mission is to support innovative, creative, and collaborative programs in the area of education and wellness for underprivileged children in india. the fund works with and supports holistic programs that focus on…

Human Services

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Special Olympics Massachusetts Inc and the most unlike its peers is Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 22 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 8% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/39

the rest of the field

11%

206,164/1,819,526

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.

06the grantee network

35 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

35/35

Grantees still filing

27/35

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$936,730Food & Nutrition$605,000Education$346,000Public Safety & Disaster$200,000Health$76,250Philanthropy$74,500Public Benefit$52,500

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.

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.

Fiduciary Charitable FoundationMA13.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fiduciary Charitable Foundation · Verizon Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Network for Good · Charities Aid Foundation America · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc

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 organisation Saxena Family 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.

2025

’20’21’22’23’24’25

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

1get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%

typical government reliance, FY20–25

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: NEW ENGLAND HINDI MANCH INC.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

low risk

8 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 2.2× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 271962441 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on NEW ENGLAND HINDI MANCH INC, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 28% of their budget — diversified.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Saxena Family Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Saxena Family Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

Saxena Family Foundation

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

35 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Saxena Family Foundation?

More from the funding graph

Saxena Family Foundation

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

35 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Saxena Family Foundation?

More from the funding graph