Skip to content
Saxena Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Saxena Foundation Inc

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$915
Granted FY2022
1
Grants FY2022
1
States reached
$915
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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 2022.

Philanthropy$46kScience & Tech$11kEducation$6kHealth$5kEmployment$4kPublic Safety & Disaster$3kInternational$2kArts & Culture$1kOther$0
02FY2022 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$915
Median grant
1
States reached
$145k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
The Leukemia Lymphoma Society$915
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 (FY17–18, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Camp Kesem: $100 → 14%American Red Cross: $3k → 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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

28%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$9k · 4 repeat orgs$25k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +193% since the first grant, against +7% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2022, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
17

Total granted

$9k
$25k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+193%
+7%

Still filing today

50%
59%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22
HealthInternationalHuman ServicesArts & CultureEmploymentRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • CI
    Communities in Schools
    5× · 2017–2021 · $6k
  • PANCREATIC CANCER ACTION NETWORK INC
    2× · 2018–2019 · $2k · revenue -19%
  • TL
    The Leukemia Lymphoma Society
    2× · 2021–2022 · $1k

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2019 · $11k
  • UP
    UNITING PROFESIONAL WOMEN ACCELERATING RELATIONSHIPS
    one grant, 2017 · $4k · revenue +2%
  • AN
    American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branchesgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $3k · revenue +46%
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
National Comprehensive Cancer Network

To define and advance quality, effective, equitable, and accessible cancer care and prevention so all people can live better lives.

Health
2
Internet Society Foundation

At the internet society foundation, we focus on funding initiatives that strengthen the internet in function and reach so that it can effectively serve all people. our work advances the vision of the internet society (isoc): the internet…

International
3
Personal Care Products Council Foundation Inc

The foundation is set up to deliver one program - look good feel better. the mission of this nationwide program is to improve the quality of life of women, men, and teens undergoing cancer treatment by offering advice on how to cope with…

Health
4
American Gas Association

American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…

—
5
Common Impact Inc

Common impact's mission is to strengthen the capacity of social change organizations, enabling them to better run and scale their programs. through its partnership with companies, common impact taps into the business skills and expertise…

Unclassified
6
Vitalant

Unite blood and biologics donors, talent, and innovation to save and improve lives.

Health
7
National Foundation for Cancer Research

To support cancer research and public education relating to prevention, earlier diagnosis, better treatments and ultimately, a cure for cancer.

Health
8
Arc Research Institute

Our mission is to accelerate scientific progress, understand the root causes of disease, and narrow the gap between discoveries and impact on patients.

Health
9
Federation of State Medical Boards of the United States Inc

The fsmb serves as the voice for state medical boards, supporting them through education, assessment, research and advocacy while providing services and initiatives that promote patient safety, quality health care and regulatory best…

Health
10
International Biomedical Research Alliance

Our mission is to invest in and accelerate the development of the most promising future leaders in biomedical research with global impact.

Health
11
Allosource

Inspired by the gift of donation from our communities, allosource responsibly provides innovative cellular and tissue allografts to advance patient healing.

Health
12
Npr Foundation

The npr foundation ("foundation") is organized and operated exclusively for the benefit of its sole supported organization, national public radio, inc. ("npr inc."). the foundation supports npr inc. through various activities such as…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Pancreatic Cancer Action Network Inc; the most unlike its peers is Platelet Disorder Support Association. 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

14 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. 14 of the 23 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
9/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

IMPACT INVESTING CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INC: $45,000 · PhilanthropyIMPACT INVESTING CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INCIndividual grant recipient: $10,958 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCommunities in Schools: $6,149 · OtherCommunities in SchoolsThe Leukemia Lymphoma Society: $1,415 · OtherThe Leukemia Lymphoma SocietyFrom The Heart Productions: $1,000 · Other+9 more: $3,402 · Other+9 moreUNITING PROFESIONAL WOMEN ACCELERATING RELATIONSHIPS: $4,000 · EmploymentAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $2,800 · Human ServicesCamp Kesem National: $100 · Human ServicesPANCREATIC CANCER ACTION NETWORK INC: $1,530 · HealthAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $419 · HealthPLATELET DISORDER SUPPORT ASSOCIATION: $350 · HealthGLOBALGIVING FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 · InternationalThe Borgen Project: $500 · InternationalCentral Texas Food Bank Inc: $1,000 · Food & Nutrition
Philanthropy$45,000Other$22,924Employment$4,000Human Services$2,900Health$2,299International$1,500Food & Nutrition$1,000

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 budgetIMPACT INVESTING CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INC: $45,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $2,800 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPANCREATIC CANCER ACTION NETWORK INC: $1,530 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCentral Texas Food Bank Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFrom The Heart Productions: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGLOBALGIVING FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Borgen Project: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNETWORK FOR GOOD: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEVERY MONDAY MATTERS INC: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $419 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPLATELET DISORDER SUPPORT ASSOCIATION: $350 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCamp Kesem National: $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.

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.

American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
American Online Giving Foundation IncDE7.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Saxena Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Saxena 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Saxena Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Saxena 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.

    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 23 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2022, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Saxena’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