· Private foundation
Trehan Charitable Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2023.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2023
- Under $10k8 grants · $10k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $35k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $110k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| INDIA HOUSE | $109,500 |
| RENAISSANCE CHARITABLE FOUNDATION | $35,000 |
| CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF FAISALABAD | $1,499 |
| DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS | $1,499 |
| FRIENDS OF PARIVAR INC | $1,499 |
| SMILE TRAIN | $1,499 |
| EC4A | $1,499 |
| UNICEF | $1,499 |
| AKANKSHA | $1,023 |
| BAPS SHRI SWAMINARAYAN MANDIR | $51 |
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 human-services grants (FY19–23, $113k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 97% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 37% of Trehan Charitable Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +101% since the first grant, against -39% for the ones you funded once.
10 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2023, 7 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2023, 3% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $117k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- DIDaya Inc3× · 2018–2020 · $6k · revenue +280%
- CRCRY-CHILD RIGHTS AND YOU AMERICA INC2× · 2018–2019 · $6k · revenue +72%
- SISewa International Inc2× · 2017–2018 · $5k · revenue +101%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2021 · $20k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2022 · $3k
- HCHINDU CHARITIES FOR AMERICAone grant, 2019 · $3k · revenue -54%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
India House Foundation is dedicated to the protection of democracy and human rights in India, from the perspective of Indian-Americans based in the USA.
Sister India provides a holistic program, protecting and uplifting women and girls, ending trafficking, child marriages and child labor, lifting families from poverty, and ensuring girls can go to school instead. We research effective…
Shadhika believes in a future where each person in India can choose their own path to meaning, purpose, and happiness. Through global philanthropy and in-country programming, Shadhika believes that education is the most effective vehicle…
Contribute vitamins and essential nutrients to the poor and unnourished children plus nourish the poor pregnant mothers in South Asia. In addition has constructed 65 wells for supplying water to tribal people in India,serving 8540 families.
US Giving to Maher provides resources to charities in India that align with our goal of an India where all people have the opportunity for a decent life, dignity, and happiness regardless of caste, gender or religion.
Foster teachings of hindu religion
ICA's mission is to support sustainable development in India by partnering with dedicated non-government organizations (NGO's) and individuals.
International relief, development and education.
Facilitating international charitable donations to support urgent and high-impact needs in India, including healthcare, education, livelihoods, and social welfare, by enabling U.S. donors to give to vetted causes through Milaap.org.
SHRI fights alongside communities to end open defecation as a key step in an ongoing struggle for health equity and soical and economic justice.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Cry-Child Rights and You America Inc and the most unlike its peers is The Hope Endowment. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 29 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 25% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
19 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 19 of the 45 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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.
- Who funds Renaissance Charitable Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds INDIA HOUSE INC ↗
- Who funds Daya Inc ↗
- Who funds CRY-CHILD RIGHTS AND YOU AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds Sewa International Inc ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
- Who funds HINDU CHARITIES FOR AMERICA ↗
- Who funds Women for Afghan Women Inc ↗
- Who funds STAR OF HOPE MISSION ↗
- Who funds The Houston Food Bank ↗
- Who funds SMILE TRAIN INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF PARIVAAR INC ↗
- Who funds The Hope Endowment ↗
- Who funds FORT BEND COUNTY WOMEN'S CENTER INC SOS/SHELTER-OUTREACH-SOLUTIONS ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION FOR INDIA STUDIES ↗
- Who funds SUNSAR MAYA INC ↗
- Who funds INDO-AMERICAN ASSOCIATION ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Shell USA Company Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Trehan Charitable Foundation 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Trehan Charitable Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Trehan Charitable Foundation 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.