Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Neelima & Mukul Parikh 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.

$117k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$75k
Largest
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Philanthropy$957kInternational$15kReligion$3kEducation$2kHealth$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $2k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $40k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $75k
$10,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$2.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNITED WAY OF SOUTHWESTERN PENNSYLV$75,000
United Way OF THE CAPITAL REGION$30,000
UNITED WAY OF CENTRAL MASSACHUSETTS$10,000
OTHER VARIOUS CHARITIES$1,466
Vialista Foundation Inc$500
BE HAPPY INC$250
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 (FY23–23, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 6%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 6%AIM FOR SEVA: $5k → 12%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

WA
IL
MA
PA
CT
CA
VA
GA
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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$958k · 6 repeat orgs$22k to everyone else

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
9

Total granted

$958k
$19k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+2%
+43%

Still filing today

50%
56%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 98% 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
ReligionInternationalPhilanthropyHealthHuman ServicesOther
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

  • UW
    United Way
    4× · 2017–2020 · $404k
  • UW
    UNITED WAY OF SOUTHWESTERN PENNSYLV
    5× · 2021–2025 · $300k
  • UW
    UNITED WAY OF THE CAPITAL REGION
    5× · 2021–2025 · $211k · revenue +2%

Funded once

  • OM
    OPERATION MEDICALgraduated
    one grant, 2024 · $10k · revenue +43%
  • AI
    ALL INDIA MOVEMENT FOR SEVA INC
    one grant, 2023 · $5k · revenue +19%
  • SR
    SRI RAM SAMSTHAN INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $2k · revenue +178%
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
Oceans of Mercy

Missionary work in the nation of India

Religion
2
United Sikh Mission

Aid to poor students, organization of eye camps, safe drinking waterAid to poor students, organization of eye camps, and arrangement of safe drinking waters.

International
3
Sri Karunamayi Institute of Vedic Studies and Meditation Center

The very essence of spirituality and religion lies in understanding the depth of ancient wisdom, connecting to the divine, and achieving inner peace. our organization, rooted in the profound teachings of vedic scriptures and the practice…

Religion
4
Parvati Parameswara Temple Inc

Relegious and spiritual worship.

Religion
5
Humanity in Unity Inc

To disseminate teachings of self-realization through incorporating the basic principles of the philosophy of spiritual teachers and other ecumenical saints from varied traditions and to provide humanitarian efforts around the globe

Recreation & Sports
6
India Awareness Foundation Inc

Public education

Education
7
Forum for Religious Freedom

Foster & protect the religious diversity and pluralism, protecting, preserving, rejuvenating and disseminating information about non aggressive religious traditions

Religion
8
Shree Ram Seva Inc

The Corporation is organized exclusively for religious, charitable, cultural and educational purposes to promote the teachings of Sanatan Hindu Dharma. Inspiration to create this organization comes from teachings of H.H. 1008 Swami Shri…

Religion
9
Brahm Foundation

Religious worship daily poojas and festi

Education
10
University of Spiritual Research
Religion
11
International Swaminarayan Satsang Org

Isso conduct religious services and activities following the teachings and principles of swaminarayan sect of a hindu religion founded and ordained by lord shri sahajanand swami, also known as lord swaminarayan.

—
12
International Eye Foundation

International eye foundation works to prevent blindness and restore sight by building capacity for quality, comprehensive and sustainable eye care services worldwide.

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is All India Movement for Seva Inc; the most unlike its peers is American Heart Association Inc. 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

9 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. 9 of the 18 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
7/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

United Way: $404,250 · OtherUnited WayUNITED WAY OF SOUTHWESTERN PENNSYLV: $300,000 · OtherUNITED WAY OF SOUTHWESTERN PENNSYLVUNITED WAY OF CENTRAL MASSACHUSETTS INC: $40,000 · OtherUNITED WAY OF CENTRAL MASSACHUSETTS INC+7 more: $5,430 · OtherUNITED WAY OF THE CAPITAL REGION: $211,000 · PhilanthropyUNITED WAY OF THE CAPITA…OPERATION MEDICAL: $9,999 · International+1 more: $101 · InternationalALL INDIA MOVEMENT FOR SEVA INC: $5,000 · Human ServicesSRI RAM SAMSTHAN INC: $2,002 · ReligionBE HAPPY INC: $250 · ReligionISKCON OF HARRISBURG: $222 · ReligionAmerican Heart Association Inc: $1,170 · Health
Other$749,680Philanthropy$211,000International$10,100Human Services$5,000Religion$2,474Health$1,170

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUNITED WAY OF THE CAPITAL REGION: $211,000 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetUNITED WAY OF CENTRAL MASSACHUSETTS INC: $40,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetOPERATION MEDICAL: $9,999 over 1y, 12% of budgetALL INDIA MOVEMENT FOR SEVA INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSRI RAM SAMSTHAN INC: $2,002 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $1,170 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBE HAPPY INC: $250 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetISKCON OF HARRISBURG: $222 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetBLIND FOUNDATION FOR INDIA: $101 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 UNITED WAY OF THE CAPITAL REGION ↗
  • Who funds UNITED WAY OF CENTRAL MASSACHUSETTS INC ↗
  • Who funds OPERATION MEDICAL ↗
  • Who funds ALL INDIA MOVEMENT FOR SEVA INC ↗
  • Who funds SRI RAM SAMSTHAN INC ↗
  • Who funds American Heart Association Inc ↗
  • Who funds BE HAPPY INC ↗
  • Who funds ISKCON OF HARRISBURG ↗
  • Who funds BLIND FOUNDATION FOR INDIA ↗

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 Giving Foundation IncDE6.2× 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 The Neelima & Mukul Parikh Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Neelima & Mukul Parikh Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%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 · 0–5%
    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 18 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 Neelima & Mukul Parikh’s filings →

    More from the funding graph