Skip to content
Tibet Fund Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Tibet Fund Inc

Founded in 1981 under the patronage of His Holiness the Dalai Lama, The Tibet Fund is the leading nonprofit organization dedicated to safeguarding Tibet's cultural heritage and strengthening Tibetan communities, both in exile and inside Tibet.

$12M
Granted FY2024still arriving
22
Grants FY2024still arriving
12
States reached
$57k
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 2024.

Education$2.0MInternational$750kReligion$317kCommunity Improvement$122kArts & Culture$55kScience & Tech$40kHealth$15kRecreation & Sports$11k
02FY2024 · 22 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 22 grants below total $600,705, the rows itemized in this filing. The $12,187,024 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $11,586,319 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k4 grants · $26k
  • $10k–50k16 grants · $468k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $107k
$23,729
Median grant
12
States reached
$14M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
University of Delaware$56,883
Tibetan Community Development Fund$50,000
Plateanx LLC$48,500
The office of Tibet$47,205
Wild Neko Pictures Inc$46,766
Tibetan Community of NYNJ$45,000
Indiana University$38,823
North Western University$34,237
University at Buffalo$31,048
Georgia Institute of Technology$24,436
International House$23,729
Rochester Institute of Technology$23,661
UC Berkeley$23,155
Rutgers State University of New Jersey$22,286
Orbitz$18,135
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 92% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%University of Delaware: $57k → 10%North Eastern University: $24k → 16%Plateaux LLC: $66k → 10%Regents of the University of California: $23k → 10%Garrison Institute: $25k → 6%Stony Brook University: $35k → 7%Tibetan Community of NYNJ: $45k → 13%University at Buffalo: $33k → 13%Rochester Institute of Technology: $24k → 14%Namgyal Monastery: $50k → 16%International House: $24k → 17%University of Incarnate Word: $62k → 16%University of Arkansas: $24k → 14%University of Arkansas: $24k → 17%Tibetan Community Development Fund: $750k → 14%University of Northern Iowa: $55k → 17%Georgia Institute of Technology: $40k → 13%Indiana University: $68k → 18%North Western University: $34k → 14%Rutgers State University of New Jersey: $22k → 8%University of Delaware: $26k → 10%Plateanx LLC: $49k → 10%UC Berkeley: $23k → 10%Tibetan Community of NYNJ: $30k → 13%University at Buffalo: $31k → 13%Namgyal Monastery Institute of Buddhist Studies: $50k → 16%Tibetan Community Development Fund: $50k → 14%University of Northern Iowa: $32k → 17%Georgia Institute of Technology: $26k → 13%Indiana University: $45k → 18%Orbitz: $33k → 14%Harvard University: $40k → 8%Plateanx LLC: $30k → 10%University at Buffalo: $25k → 13%The office of Tibet: $47k → 14%University of Northern Iowa: $28k → 17%Georgia Institute of Technology: $24k → 13%Indiana University: $45k → 18%Plateaux LLC: $29k → 10%Wild Neko Pictures Inc: $47k → 17%Indiana University: $39k → 18%Plateaux LLC: $26k → 10%New York University: $100k → 17%George Washington University: $42k → 14%New York University: $69k → 17%New York University: $55k → 17%New York University: $22k → 17%Anonymous: $23k → 17%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
MT
IL
WI
NY
MA
IA
IN
NJ
CA
CO
MO
DE
KS
AR
DC
LA
GA
TX

Grants abroad, by region: $11M on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region, $11M to organizations and $29k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

South Asia$11M · 100% · 64 grants · 8 people

Stated purpose: Community Development · Culture Preservation · Scholarship

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. 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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

67%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.2M · 21 repeat orgs$1.1M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +46% since the first grant, against +10% for those funded once.

21 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
7

Total granted

$2.2M
$838k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+46%
+10%

Still filing today

38%
43%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 62% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $228k 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
EducationInternationalYouth DevelopmentRecreation & 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

  • NY
    New York University
    5× · 2019–2023 · $258k · revenue +51%
  • TG
    The George Washington University
    5× · 2019–2024 · $134k · revenue +23%
  • TT
    THE TIBETAN COMMUNITY OF NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY INC
    4× · 2017–2024 · $92k · revenue +103%

Funded once

  • TC
    TIBETAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND INC
    one grant, 2022 · $750k · revenue -83% · 95% of their budget
  • TG
    THE GARRISON INSTITUTE
    one grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue +14%
  • RO
    REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
    one grant, 2019 · $23k
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
Trustees of Tufts College

Education and Research

Education
2
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education
3
Trustees of Dartmouth College

Dartmouth College educates the most promising students and prepares them for a lifetime of learning and of responsible leadership, through a faculty dedicated to teaching and the creation of knowledge.

Education
4
Lehigh University

The university's goal in the coming decade is to advance learning through the integration of teaching, research and service to others. the core of this goal is to prepare graduates to engage with the world and lead lives of meaning. to do…

Education
5
University of New Haven

The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…

Education
6
Manhattanville University

To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.

Education
7
Trustees of Boston University

Organization's mission: boston university is an international, comprehensive, private research university, committed to educating students to be reflective, resourceful individuals ready to live, adapt, and lead in an interconnected world.…

—
8
The New School

The new school's mission is to prepare our students to understand, contribute to, and succeed in a rapidly changing society, and thus make the world a better and more just place. (continued on schedule o)

Education
9
Western New England University

Western new england university, a comprehensive private institution with a tradition of excellence in teaching and scholarship and a commitment to service, awards undergraduate, master's, and doctoral degrees in various departments from…

Education
10
Boston Architectural College

The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.

—
11
Fordham University

Fordham university, the jesuit university of new york, is committed to the discovery of wisdom and the transmission of learning, through research and through education of the highest quality. for more information, see schedule o.

Education
12
Manhattan University

Manhattan university is an independent catholic instituion of higher learning that embraces qualified men and women of all faiths, cultures, and traditions. the mission of manhattan university is to provide a contemporary, person-centered…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northeastern University; the most unlike its peers is Tibetan Community Development Fund 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

18 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. 18 of the 39 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/18
Grantees still filing
12/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Indiana University School of Medicine: $230,648 · OtherIndiana University School of MedicinePlateaux LLC: $199,560 · OtherPlateaux LLCSTATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK COLLEGE AT PURCHASE: $161,192 · OtherSTATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK COLLEGE AT PURCHASEUNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN IOWA: $121,633 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN IOWANAMGYAL MONASTERY INSTITUTE OF BUDDHIST STUDIES: $111,200 · OtherNAMGYAL MONASTERY INSTITUTE OF BUDDHIST STUDIESGEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $105,451 · OtherGEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGYDE SHEMA INC: $103,950 · OtherDE SHEMA INCRUTGERS THE STATE UNIVERSITY: $95,550 · OtherRUTGERS THE STATE UNIVERSITYUNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AT LITTLE ROCK: $91,687 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AT LITTLE ROCKUNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE: $83,172 · Other+12 more: $353,164 · Other+12 moreTIBETAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND INC: $750,000 · InternationalTIBETAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPME…INTERNATIONAL HOUSE: $38,582 · InternationalNew York University: $258,082 · EducationNew York UniversityThe George Washington University: $134,000 · EducationThe George Washington Univ…THE TIBETAN COMMUNITY OF NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY INC: $92,000 · EducationTHE TIBETAN COMMUNITY OF N…University of the Incarnate Word: $67,897 · EducationUniversity of the Incarnat…UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST FOUNDATION INC: $56,494 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETT…President and Fellows of Harvard College: $39,528 · EducationNORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY: $34,313 · Education+6 more: $94,460 · Education+6 moreNorthwestern University: $34,237 · Recreation & SportsTIBETAN YOUTH ASSOCIATION INC: $13,300 · Youth Development
Other$1,657,207International$788,582Education$776,774Recreation & Sports$34,237Youth Development$13,300

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 budgetTIBETAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND INC: $750,000 over 1y, 95% of budgetNew York University: $258,082 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetThe George Washington University: $134,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetDE SHEMA INC: $103,950 over 6y, 95% of budgetTHE TIBETAN COMMUNITY OF NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY INC: $92,000 over 4y, 2.5% of budgetUniversity of the Incarnate Word: $67,897 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST FOUNDATION INC: $56,494 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $39,528 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINTERNATIONAL HOUSE: $38,582 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetNORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY: $34,313 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNorthwestern University: $34,237 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE GARRISON INSTITUTE: $25,200 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetRochester Institute of Technology: $23,661 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNABU GLOBAL INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetTeachers College Columbia University: $13,557 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTIBETAN YOUTH ASSOCIATION INC: $13,300 over 1y, 8.3% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY FOUNDATION: $11,219 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF DENVER: $5,823 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 TIBETAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds New York University ↗
  • Who funds The George Washington University ↗
  • Who funds DE SHEMA INC ↗
  • Who funds THE TIBETAN COMMUNITY OF NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY INC ↗
  • Who funds University of the Incarnate Word ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗
  • Who funds INTERNATIONAL HOUSE ↗
  • Who funds NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds Northwestern University ↗
  • Who funds THE GARRISON INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds Rochester Institute of Technology ↗
  • Who funds NABU GLOBAL INC ↗
  • Who funds Teachers College Columbia University ↗
  • Who funds TIBETAN YOUTH ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF DENVER ↗

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.

Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO2.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Tibet Fund Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Tibet Fund Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College: 7% of income from government
  • Northeastern University: 7% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get 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 · 0–20%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Tibet Fund Inc?

Find your warmest path to Tibet Fund 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 39 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Tibet’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