Skip to content
Donald J and Joan P McNamara Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Donald J and Joan P McNamara Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$108k
Granted FY2024still arriving
6
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$30k
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, FY2019 to 2024.

Social Science$160kEducation$145kReligion$120kHealth$40kEmployment$40kEnvironment$10kPhilanthropy$6kYouth Development$5kOther$0
02FY2024 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $3k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $105k
$20,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$76k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE UNIVERSITY OF AUSTIN$30,000
AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE$25,000
SISTERS OF THE VISITATION$20,000
COMMIT2DALLAS$20,000
BAYLOR HEALTHCARE SYSTEM FOUNDATION$10,000
CAMP BLUE SKIES FOUNDATION$2,500
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:

Its human-services grants (FY24–24, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CAMP BLUE SKIES FOUNDATION: $3k → 10%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.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$440k · 6 repeat orgs$83k to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
4

Total granted

$440k
$50k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+47%
+55%

Still filing today

67%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $33k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24
EducationPhilanthropySocial ScienceHealthHuman 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

  • AE
    AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH
    6× · 2019–2024 · $150k · revenue +47%
  • C
    COMMIT2DALLAS
    2× · 2023–2024 · $40k · revenue +28%
  • BH
    Baylor Health Care System Foundation
    4× · 2021–2024 · $40k · revenue +93%

Funded once

  • TU
    THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN
    one grant, 2023 · $30k
  • HB
    HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL
    one grant, 2021 · $10k
  • PS
    PROJECT SHELTER INC
    one grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue +10%
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
Scott & White Healthcare Foundation

To foster and support the activities and purposes of Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH), to encourage broad-based public support of the healthcare system and its affiliated institutions, and to advance the medical objectives, including…

Health
2
Dallas College Foundation Inc

Dallas college foundation enhances the level of achievement and excellence of dallas college by providing scholarships, eliminating barriers that prevent students from attending and graduating, and supporting innovation.

Education
3
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
4
Ucsf Foundation Investment Company

The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.

Education
5
Dallas Seminary Foundation

To support the mission of Dallas Theological Seminary by offering charitable planned giving and other related services to friends of the Seminary.

Education
6
Texas Business Hall of Fame Foundation

To recognize the accomplishments and contributions of our outstanding Texas business leaders and to perpetuate and inspire the values of entrepreneurial spirit, personal integrity, and community leadership in all generations of Texans.

Community Improvement
7
University of South Florida Foundation Inc

University of South Florida Foundation, Inc.'s mission is to provide charitable and educational aid to the University of South Florida; to promote education and other related activities of the University; and to encourage research,…

Education
8
Furman University

The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.

Education
9
Purdue Research Foundation

The primary mission of Purdue Research Foundation is to advance the mission of Purdue University.

Education
10
Dallas Citizens Council

To lead and serve in the moments that matter the most for the people of dallas.

—
11
Vanderbilt University

See Disclosure Above.

Education
12
The University of TexasTexas a&M Investment Management Company

To generate superior long-term investment returns to support The University of Texas and Texas A&M University systems as they provide world-class teaching, push the boundaries of discovery, and achieve excellence in patient healthcare for…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Dallas Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Camp Blue Skies 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

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 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
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

SISTERS OF THE VISITATION: $120,000 · OtherSISTERS OF THE VISITATIONTHE UNIVERSITY OF AUSTIN: $30,000 · OtherTHE UNIVERSITY OF AUSTINTHE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN: $30,000 · OtherTHE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTINAERA: $10,000 · OtherHARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL: $10,000 · OtherAMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH: $150,000 · Social ScienceAMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE FO…THE GEORGE W BUSH FOUNDATION: $80,000 · EducationTHE GEORGE W BUSH FOUNDATI…COMMIT2DALLAS: $40,000 · EducationCOMMIT2DALLASVIRGINIA TECH FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 · EducationBaylor Health Care System Foundation: $40,000 · HealthPROJECT SHELTER INC: $5,250 · PhilanthropyPebble Beach Company Foundation: $5,000 · PhilanthropyTHE DALLAS FOUNDATION: $1,000 · PhilanthropyCamp Blue Skies Foundation: $2,500 · Human Services
Other$200,000Social Science$150,000Education$125,000Health$40,000Philanthropy$11,250Human Services$2,500

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetAMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH: $150,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetTHE GEORGE W BUSH FOUNDATION: $80,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetCOMMIT2DALLAS: $40,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetBaylor Health Care System Foundation: $40,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetPROJECT SHELTER INC: $5,250 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetVIRGINIA TECH FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPebble Beach Company Foundation: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCamp Blue Skies Foundation: $2,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHE DALLAS FOUNDATION: $1,000 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Fidelity Investments …
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Donald J and Joan P McNamara Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Donald J and Joan P McNamara Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%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 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Donald J and Joan P McNamara’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