Skip to content
Wasi-Shirin Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Wasi-Shirin 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.

$33k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$12k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

International$134kHuman Services$9kHealth$5kReligion$4kEducation$4kFood & Nutrition$3k
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $9k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $24k
$12,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$165k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SPAANDANB$12,300
ABUNDANCE OF GOOD$12,000
IRC$7,000
Individual grant recipient$1,500
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 (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 97% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%SONAR BANGLA FOUNDATION: $1k → 8%LEAD INC: $2k → 10%IRC: $7k → 17%GLOBAL CHARITABLE AND WELFARE: $10k → 21%CARE: $1k → 13%ISLAMIC RELIEF USA: $2k → 9%INDIA COMMUNITY CENTER: $40 → 8%AGAMI INC: $500 → 10%INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTE: $1k → 17%ABUNDANCE OF GOOD: $31k → 21%SECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY: $250 → 8%INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE: $1k → 17%ABUNDANCE OF GOOD: $19k → 21%INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE: $1k → 17%ABUNDANCE OF GOOD: $12k → 21%INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE: $1k → 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.
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.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$135k · 5 repeat orgs$22k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +63% since the first grant, against +12% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
8

Total granted

$135k
$15k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+63%
+12%

Still filing today

80%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 79% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
InternationalHealthFood & NutritionOther
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

  • AO
    ABUNDANCE OF GOOD INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $61k · 60% of their budget
  • S
    SPAANDANB
    5× · 2020–2025 · $55k · revenue -24%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    4× · 2022–2025 · $10k

Funded once

  • GC
    GLOBAL CHARITABLE AND WELFARE
    one grant, 2022 · $10k
  • IR
    ISLAMIC RELIEF USA
    one grant, 2023 · $2k · revenue -11%
  • LI
    LEAD INC
    one grant, 2022 · $2k
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
Charity Global Inc

Charity: water is a non-profit organization bringing clean and safe water to people around the world. continued on schedule o.

Human Services
2
World Relief Corp of National Association of Evangelicals

To boldly engage the world's greatest crises in partnership with the church.

International
3
Muslim Aid America

Provide help to people who are victims of natural disasters or conflicts or suffering from poverty, hunger, disease, illiteracy, discrimination, homelessness, debt, unemployment, injustice, or lack of skills or economic opportunity.

Public Safety & Disaster
4
Us Help Inc

We are a non-profit charity organization that humbly aims to provide to those in need around the world. With gratitude & love, we try to provide food, water, clothing, shelter, peace & education to needy persons, families and communities.

Human Services
5
Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition

The mission of the global alliance for improved nutrition (gain) is to improve the consumption of healthier diets for all, especially the most vulnerable, by improving the availability, affordability, desirability, and sustainability of…

Food & Nutrition
6
Ankur International

Assisting financially challenged patients with life threatening emergency medical conditions. It also helps building charitable healthcare clinics free schools building and running orphanages and provide scholarships to poor needy students…

International
7
Ajr International

Providing clean water and food security in extremely impoverished regions.This year we implemented an educational aspect to support widows and orphans.

Philanthropy
8
Help Nigeria Help Nigeria

International relief -this organization work to relieve poverty in developing countries like nigeria. by providing funds,technical asistance and supplies which improve the health, education, welfare, social well being and self reliance of…

International
9
Isaad foundation

Isaad Foundation aspires to preserve human dignity and to help achieve happiness, and to achieve the necessary needs for all individuals.

Philanthropy
10
Rahma Worldwide Aid and Development

Rahma delivers emergency and development programs to needy communities, without discrimination based on gender, race, religion, or location. we aim to empower and develop individuals and communities affected by hardship globally.

International
11
International Association for Child Aid

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.

Human Services
12
Assist International Inc

Assist international partners with changemakers around the world to provide solutions that save lives and build resilient communities. we accomplish our mission with actionable projects that make a lasting and sustainable impact on the…

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Spaandanb; the most unlike its peers is Sonar Bangla 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

10 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. 10 of the 14 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
5/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ABUNDANCE OF GOOD INC: $61,450 · InternationalABUNDANCE OF GOOD INCSPAANDANB: $55,494 · InternationalSPAANDANBInternational Rescue Committee INC: $4,247 · International+4 more: $3,190 · InternationalIndividual grant recipient: $9,500 · OtherIndividual grant recip…GLOBAL CHARITABLE AND WELFARE: $9,500 · OtherGLOBAL CHARITABLE AND …IRC: $7,000 · OtherIRCECHO INC: $4,050 · OtherECHO INCLEAD INC: $1,500 · OtherSONAR BANGLA FOUNDATION: $1,000 · HealthSECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY: $250 · Food & Nutrition
International$124,381Other$31,550Health$1,000Food & Nutrition$250

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 budgetABUNDANCE OF GOOD INC: $61,450 over 3y, 60% of budgetSPAANDANB: $55,494 over 5y, 2.2% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $4,247 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetECHO INC: $4,050 over 2y, 7.0% of budgetISLAMIC RELIEF USA: $1,600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC: $1,050 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSONAR BANGLA FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAGAMI INC: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINDIA COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $40 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.

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.

Paypal Charitable Giv…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Paypal Charitable Giving FundDC9.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · 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 Wasi-Shirin Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Wasi-Shirin Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%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 · 0–40%
    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 14 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 Wasi-Shirin’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