Skip to content

· Private foundation

Tergar Meditation L A

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$28k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$18k
Largest
01What it funds
0192% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$653kHuman Services$8kHealth$7kFood & Nutrition$2kAnimals$680Public Safety & Disaster$250Other$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k6 grants · $11k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $18k
$360
Median grant
3
States reached
$33k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$17,500
TERGAR FOUNDATOIN OF NEPAL$8,000
Individual grant recipient$1,600
ASPCA$360
Individual grant recipient$309
FRANCISCAN MISSION$300
UNICEF$300
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.

US giving: 11% of grant dollars ($72k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 89% that went abroad ($600k) is mapped below.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 97% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%KHEMPO KUNGA: $11k → 11%INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFA: $300 → 8%LAMA KUNGA: $21k → 11%STANFORD MEDICINE: $2k → 7%THE LEUKEMIALYMPHOMA SOCIETY: $2k → 8%MIGGI DEMEYER: $3k → 10%SJ JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITA: $528 → 10%UNICEF: $300 → 17%International Kagyu Monlam: $8k → 21%THE HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE UNITED ST: $200 → 14%FRANCISCAN MISSION: $300 → 10%TERGAR FOUNDATOIN OF NEPAL: $150k → 22%TAACO: $300 → 5%ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE RESEARCH: $200 → 8%CATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICES: $250 → 19%Long life of Rinpoche: $2k → 11%LAMA KUNGA: $5k → 11%STANFORD MEDICINE: $500 → 7%THE LEUKEMIALYMPHOMA SOCIETY: $700 → 8%FEEDING AMERICA: $1k → 10%SJ JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITA: $350 → 10%ASPCA: $360 → 17%TERGAR FOUNDATOIN OF NEPAL: $8k → 22%LAMA THILE: $1k → 11%TERGAR INTERNATIONAL: $3k → 11%THE LEUKEMIALYMPHOMA SOCIETY: $500 → 8%FEEDING AMERICA: $600 → 10%SJ JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITA: $250 → 10%ASPCA: $180 → 17%TERGAR FOUNDATOIN OF NEPAL: $1k → 22%CHHEWANG THILE: $800 → 11%TERGAR INTERNATIONAL: $2k → 11%THE LEUKEMIALYMPHOMA SOCIETY: $200 → 8%FEEDING AMERICA: $300 → 10%LAMA THILE: $309 → 11%TERGAR INTERNATIONAL: $800 → 11%ALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $200 → 10%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

MN
NY
MA
OH
CA
CO
MD
AZ
DC

Beyond the US: 89% of all-years giving ($600k)

3 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
India$434k · 2 grants
Nepal$159k · 3 grants
OC$8k · 1 grant
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$662k · 10 repeat orgs$36k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
12

Total granted

$662k
$34k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
+2%

Still filing today

30%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsReligionInternationalOther
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

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    3× · 2018–2025 · $451k
  • TF
    TERGAR FOUNDATOIN OF NEPAL
    3× · 2017–2025 · $159k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    2× · 2018–2019 · $26k

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $11k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $8k
  • TN
    TSOKNYI NUNS WELFARE FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2019 · $8k
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
Humane World for Animals International

HUMANE WORLD FOR ANIMALS INTERNATIONAL, FKA HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL (HSI), works around the globe to promote the human-animal bond, rescue and protect dogs and cats, improve farm animal welfare, protect wildlife, promote animal-free…

Animals
2
Four Paws International Inc

Our vision is a world where humans treat animals with respect, empathy and understanding. four paws mission is to be the strong, global and independent voice for animals.

Animals
3
Humane Farm Animal Care

Every farmer and rancher participating in the Certified Humane program had to modify their operations to meet the Animal Care Standards and be certified. Schedule O

Animals
4
Animal Wellness Action

To prevent cruelty to animals, we promote enacting and enforcing good public policies. enacting good laws depends upon electing good lawmakers, and we remind voters which candidates care about and support animal issues.

Human Services
5
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
6
American Humane Association

Founded in 1877, american humane association, dba american humane society (american humane) is committed to ensuring the safety, welfare and well-being of animals. our leadership programs are first to serve in promoting and nurturing the…

Animals
7
Global Animal Partnership
Animals
8
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Inc

Protection of animal rights

Animals
9
Wildlife Conservation Society

The wildlife conservation society (wcs) saves wildlife and wild places worldwide through science, conservation action, education, and inspiring people to value nature.

Animals
10
Humane World Action Fund

To pass animal protection laws, educate the public, and support humane candidates for office.

Animals
11
Veterinarians Without Borders Usa

Our mission is to strengthen animal health and welfare to build more resilient communities. we do this by enhancing veterinary care, bolstering community disaster response and recovery, championing sustainable livelihoods, and improving…

International
12
World Animal Protection

World animal protection is a global organization working to end factory farming and wildlife exploitation. we expose cruel systems, promote animal-friendly alternatives, and influence policy change. for over 75 years, we've been rewriting…

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is United States Fund for Unicef; the most unlike its peers is Yongey Foundation. 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

8 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. 8 of the 26 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
4/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $451,200 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTERGAR FOUNDATOIN OF NEPAL: $159,050 · OtherTERGAR FOUNDATOIN OF NEPALIndividual grant recipient: $25,700 · Other+17 more: $48,256 · Other+17 moreYongey Foundation: $12,700 · ReligionTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $2,000 · EducationTHE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $540 · AnimalsINTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFARE INC: $300 · AnimalsHumane World for Animals Inc: $200 · AnimalsUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $300 · International
Other$684,206Religion$12,700Education$2,000Animals$1,040International$300

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 budgetYongey Foundation: $12,700 over 3y, 3.3% of budgetTERGAR INTERNATIONAL: $5,450 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $540 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFARE INC: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHumane World for Animals Inc: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $200 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 Yongey Foundation ↗
  • Who funds TERGAR INTERNATIONAL ↗
  • Who funds THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ↗
  • Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
  • Who funds INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFARE INC ↗
  • Who funds Humane World for Animals Inc ↗
  • Who funds ALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Tergar Meditation L A funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Tergar Meditation L A. 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%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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 · 0–20%
    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 26 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Tergar Meditation L A’s filings →

    More from the funding graph