Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

The Cyber Sikh Organization a Non-Profit California Public Benefit

The cyber sikh organization has been organized for charitable, religious, and educational purposes.

$97k
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$12k
Largest
01What you fund
01

What you funded, over time

By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 52% of THE CYBER SIKH ORGANIZATION A NON-PROFIT CALIFORNIA PUBLIC BENEFIT’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.

02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 2 grants below total $21,736 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $96,945 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $75,209 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

$11,736
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NEW YORK FILM ACADEMY$11,736
RADHA KRISHNA MANDIR$10,000
02The need
03

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 US giving — 81% of grant dollars ($287k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 20% that went abroad ($69k) is mapped below.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY21–21, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%DASVANDH NETWORK: $10k → 16%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

Beyond the US — 20% of all-years giving ($69k)

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

grant dollars sentlessmore
Canada$38k · 2 grants
United Kingdom$32k · 1 grant

Grants abroad, by region — $26k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$26k · 100% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: Education

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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.

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.

59%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$211k · 4 repeat orgs$145k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +62% since the first grant, against +16% for the ones you funded once.

4 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
9

Total granted

$211k
$133k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+62%
+16%

Still filing today

50%
56%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 46% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $12k 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
EducationReligionHuman ServicesInternationalPhilanthropyOther

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

  • CU
    CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY
    3× · 2017–2019 · $106k · revenue +62%
  • TU
    THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH
    2× · 2021–2022 · $38k
  • RK
    RADHA KRISHNA MANDIR
    2× · 2023–2024 · $37k

Funded once

  • WC
    WADHAM COLLEGE
    one grant, 2022 · $32k
  • TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2023 · $22k · revenue +6%
  • University of Chicago
    one grant, 2022 · $20k · revenue +22%

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.

1
Sikh Information Centre

The Sikh Information Centre is based on Sikhi which stresses unity truth and creativity of a personal spiritual enlightenment The organization strives to develop evaluate and disseminate articles programs and social events at a local…

Human Services
2
University of Spiritual Research
Religion
3
Sikh Council On Religion and Education Inc
Religion
4
Nanak Naam

The organizations purpose is for the public benefit the advancement of the Sikh religion, primarily but not exclusively, in particular the ancient practice of meditation.

Religion
5
Chancellor Masters & Scholars of the University of Oxford

The principal objects of the University are the advancement of learning by teaching and research, and its dissemination by every means. We work as one Oxford bringing together our staff, students and alumni, our colleges, faculties,…

6
Nad Music Institute

NAD Music Institute is engaged in research, preservation, and education of music through research and collaboration with expert individuals and organizations across the world.

Arts & Culture
7
Nalanda 20

Improve excellence and access in higher education. Current focus is on India. Thus, Nalanda 2.0's current focus is to make India's higher education system world-class by building a world-class multidisciplinary research university,…

Education
8
The Central European University

Ceu is committed to promoting the values of open society and self-reflective critical thinking. it aims at excellence in the mastery of established knowledge, courage to pursue the creation of new knowledge in the humanities, the social…

International
9
Guru Nanak Study Circle

To build a sikh temple that cares about the community, bring spiritualism, peace around inland empire area and around the world. we intend to revive the true teachings of guru nanak dev ji, guru granth sahib ji and all guru sahaibans,…

Religion
10
Sikh Aid Usa

To support needy people of any religion worldwide

Religion
11
Sikh Study Circle

The organization is formed for religious purposes. the organization is operating as a temple and serves as a place of worship for devotees of sikh community. it is also a place for the study of sikh religion.

12
Gurdwara Dashmesh Darbar

Relegious services

Religion

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of Chicago and the most unlike its peers is Sikh Center of the Orange County. 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 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 14 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH — $37,795 · OtherTHE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISHRADHA KRISHNA MANDIR — $37,000 · OtherRADHA KRISHNA MANDIRWADHAM COLLEGE — $31,674 · OtherWADHAM COLLEGENanak Prachar Sabha Inc — $30,300 · OtherNanak Prachar Sabha IncTRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY — $21,762 · OtherTRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITYSIKH AMERICAN VETERANS ALLIAN — $12,000 · OtherSIKH AMERICAN VETERANS ALLIANSIKH FLOAT ROSE PARADE — $10,000 · OtherSIKH FLOAT ROSE PARADE+1 more — $5,001 · OtherCHAPMAN UNIVERSITY — $106,200 · EducationCHAPMAN UNIVERSITYUniversity of Chicago — $20,321 · EducationUniversity of ChicagoUnited Sikh Mission — $12,500 · InternationalCANDID — $11,736 · PhilanthropyDASVANDH NETWORK — $10,000 · Human ServicesSikh Center Of The Orange County — $10,000 · Religion
Other$185,532Education$126,521International$12,500Philanthropy$11,736Human Services$10,000Religion$10,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetCHAPMAN UNIVERSITY — $106,200 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNanak Prachar Sabha Inc — $30,300 over 2y, 3.9% of budgetTRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY — $21,762 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Chicago — $20,321 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUnited Sikh Mission — $12,500 over 1y, 3.5% of budgetCANDID — $11,736 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDASVANDH NETWORK — $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetSikh Center Of The Orange County — $10,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budget
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.

Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA4.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 The Cyber Sikh Organization a Non-Profit California Public Benefit 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 12%
  • Trustees of Boston University12% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
typical government reliance, FY2025

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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to The Cyber Sikh Organization a Non-Profit California Public Benefit?

Find your warmest path to The Cyber Sikh Organization a Non-Profit California Public Benefit 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 14 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph