Skip to content

· Private foundation

Murray 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.

$363k
Granted FY2025still arriving
19
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$91k
Largest
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

International$401kHuman Services$232kHealth$228kReligion$200kEducation$185kCrime & Legal$150kCommunity Improvement$33kYouth Development$25kOther$0
02FY2025 · 19 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k7 grants · $22k
  • $10k–50k11 grants · $250k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $91k
$10,500
Median grant
5
States reached
$8.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
VINA CAPITAL FOUNDATION$91,000
Individual grant recipient$47,597
SYMPA MEALS (DANG XUAN HOP)$45,000
LOPEZ LIBRARY$25,000
VIN SON 1 ORPHANAGE$25,000
MANHATTAN BEACH ROTARY CLUB FOUNDATION$25,000
Individual grant recipient$20,000
TU BIEN BO DE$20,000
TUONG NGUYEN USA FOUNDATION$12,000
FRIENDS OF CHILDREN JUSTICE CENTER$10,500
THE FRIENDS OF LOPEZ ISLAND POOL (FLIP)$10,000
CATHERINE WASHBURN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION$10,000
WESTERN BUDDHIST FOUNDATION$8,000
BCH CONG DOAN CTY TNHH CONG$6,000
ANIMAL PROTECTION OF NEW MEXICO$5,000
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.

US giving: 40% of grant dollars ($655k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 60% that went abroad ($968k) is mapped below.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 29% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%TU VIEN TAY PHUONG: $8k → 5%CUPERTINO ROTARY ENDOWMENT: $50k → 8%TUONG NGUYEN USA FOUNDATION: $21k → 9%OLIVE CREST: $15k → 10%ROTARY CLUB OF SACRAMENTO FOUNDATION: $10k → 12%Gotama Temple: $8k → 14%SOUTH MAUI LEARNING OHANA: $1k → 9%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $5k → 14%ROTARY CLUB 29 FOUNDATION U AT BANCFIRST: $10k → 16%TU BIEN BO DE: $20k → 9%LOPEZ LIBRARY: $25k → 10%OPERATION SMILE: $30k → 10%CUPERTINO ROTARY ENDOWMENT: $25k → 8%TUONG NGUYEN USA FOUNDATION: $12k → 9%OLIVE CREST: $13k → 10%ROTARY DISTRICT 5280 CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $10k → 14%PAIA YOUTH AND CULTURAL CENTER: $5k → 9%TU VIEN BO DE: $1k → 9%CATHERINE WASHBURN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION: $10k → 10%OPERATION SMILE: $25k → 10%WESTERN BUDDHIST FOUNDATION: $16k → 8%TUONG NGUYEN USA FOUNDATION: $11k → 9%OLIVE CREST: $5k → 10%MANHATTAN BEACH ROTARY CLUB FOUNDATION: $25k → 14%PAIA YOUTH AND CULTURAL CENTER: $5k → 9%THE FRIENDS OF LOPEZ ISLAND POOL (FLIP): $10k → 10%WESTERN BUDDHIST FOUNDATION: $8k → 8%TUONG NGUYEN USA FOUNDATION: $10k → 9%OLIVE CREST: $5k → 10%PAIA YOUTH AND CULTURAL CENTER: $5k → 9%COUGAR RIDGE ELEMENTARY PTSA: $1k → 9%THE FRIENDS OF LOPEZ ISLAND POOL (FLIP): $2k → 10%KNT FOUNDATION: $8k → 8%TUONG NGUYEN USA FOUNDATION: $10k → 9%OLIVE CREST: $5k → 10%PAIA YOUTH AND CULTURAL CENTER: $5k → 9%THE FRIENDS OF LOPEZ ISLAND POOL (FLIP): $2k → 10%TUONG NGUYEN USA FOUNDATION: $8k → 9%OLIVE CREST: $5k → 10%PA'IA YOUTH AND CULTURAL CENTER: $5k → 9%LOPEZ LIBRARY: $1k → 10%FRIENDS OF CHILDREN JUSTICE CENTER: $50k → 9%LOP AN TINH XA: $10k → 10%FRIENDS OF CHILDREN JUSTICE CENTER: $45k → 9%FRIENDS OF THE CHILDREN JUSTICE CENTER OF MAUI: $20k → 9%FRIENDS OF THE CHILDREN JUSTICE CENTER OF MAUI: $20k → 9%FRIENDS OF THE CHILDREN JUSTICE CENTER OF MAUI: $15k → 9%FRIENDS OF CHILDREN JUSTICE CENTER: $11k → 9%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.

Beyond the US: 60% of all-years giving ($968k)

2 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
Vietnam$926k · 24 grants
Canada$42k · 9 grants
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 9% of Murray Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Murray Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 48% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.7M · 26 repeat orgs$264k to everyone else

26 repeat relationships: 13 still active in FY2025, 13 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

26
17

Total granted

$1.7M
$192k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+41%
+90%

Still filing today

38%
24%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $72k 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
EducationInternationalHealthPhilanthropyCivil RightsReligionOther
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

  • FO
    Friends of Childrens Justice Center
    6× · 2020–2025 · $161k · revenue +109%
  • OS
    OPERATION SMILE INC
    2× · 2019–2020 · $55k · revenue +26%
  • OC
    OLIVE CREST
    7× · 2018–2024 · $49k · revenue +126%

Funded once

  • SO
    Salesians of Don Brosco Vietnam
    one grant, 2017 · $40k
  • SO
    Saliesian of Don Bosco
    one grant, 2018 · $40k
  • SO
    SALESIENS OF DON BROSCO
    one grant, 2023 · $25k
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
The Rotary Club of Chico Foundation

To provide humanitarian service, encourage high ethical standards in all vocations, and help build goodwill and peace in the world.

Community Improvement
2
Salinas Steinbeck Rotary Club

We provide service to others, promote integrity, and advance world understanding, goodwill, and peace through our fellowship of business, professional, and community leaders.

—
3
Camino Real Rotary Club Inc

Provide service to others promote integrity and advance world understanding goodwill and peace throught the fellowship of business professionals and comunity leaders

Philanthropy
4
Rotary International Los Gatos

The object of rotary is to encourage and foster the ideal of service as a basis of worthy enterprise. motto is service above self.

—
5
La Mesa Sunrise Rotary Club Foundation

The primary purpose of the la mesa sunrise rotary club foundation is to raise funds to use in charitable purposes. local and international projects. often associated with the activities of the la mesa sunrise rotary club.

—
6
Rotary Club of Torrance Del Amo Charitable Foundation
—
7
Los Altos Sunset Rotary Club Endowment Fund Inc
Community Improvement
8
Rotary Club of Kona Community Foundation
Education
9
Rotary Club of Tucson Foundation

The purpose of the foundation is to support the local and international communities through donations to educational, community and international charities.

Community Improvement
10
Rotary Club of Lahaina Sunset Foundation

The mission of the rotary club of lahaina sunset is to enhance the quality of life in west maui and beyond by engaging in meaningful and achievable projects within the rotary's avenues of service. within community service, we have chosen…

Environment
11
Chula Vista Rotary Foundation

Assist local charitable organizations, including ymca, boys & girls club, scholarships, and many other community projects.

Philanthropy
12
Charitable Foundation of the Rotary Club of Tacoma North State
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rotary Club of Sacramento Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Tuong Nguyen Usa Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

15 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. 15 of the 49 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
13/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

VINA CAPITAL FOUNDATION: $294,100 · OtherVINA CAPITAL FOUNDATIONSALESIENS OF DON BOSCO: $292,130 · OtherSALESIENS OF DON BOSCOSYMPA MEALS (DANG XUAN HOP): $217,552 · OtherSYMPA MEALS (DANG XUAN HOP)UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON: $82,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $75,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $69,030 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $63,597 · OtherVIN SON 1 ORPHANAGE: $61,000 · Other+31 more: $414,300 · Other+31 moreFriends of Childrens Justice Center: $160,500 · Civil RightsFriends o…TUONG NGUYEN USA FOUNDATION: $71,500 · InternationalOPERATION SMILE INC: $55,000 · InternationalOLIVE CREST: $48,500 · HealthAmerican Heart Association Inc: $5,150 · HealthCORPORATION OF GONZAGA UNIVERSITY: $40,000 · EducationROTARY INTL DISTRICT 5280 CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $10,000 · Education+1 more: $1,000 · EducationFRIENDS OF LOPEZ ISLAND POOL: $15,695 · PhilanthropyANIMAL PROTECTION NEW MEXICO: $10,000 · Animals
Other$1,568,709Civil Rights$160,500International$126,500Health$53,650Education$51,000Philanthropy$15,695Animals$10,000

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 budgetFriends of Childrens Justice Center: $160,500 over 6y, 9.4% of budgetTUONG NGUYEN USA FOUNDATION: $71,500 over 6y, 27% of budgetOPERATION SMILE INC: $55,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetOLIVE CREST: $48,500 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetCORPORATION OF GONZAGA UNIVERSITY: $40,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF LOPEZ ISLAND POOL: $15,695 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetCatherine Washburn Medical Association: $10,260 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetANIMAL PROTECTION NEW MEXICO: $10,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetROTARY CLUB OF SACRAMENTO FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetROTARY INTL DISTRICT 5280 CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 8.4% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $5,150 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTU VIEN BO DE: $1,680 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetSOUTH MAUI LEARNING OHANA: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCOUGAR RIDGE ELEMENTARY P T S A: $1,000 over 1y, 0.8% 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 Friends of Childrens Justice Center ↗
  • Who funds TUONG NGUYEN USA FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds OPERATION SMILE INC ↗
  • Who funds OLIVE CREST ↗
  • Who funds CORPORATION OF GONZAGA UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF LOPEZ ISLAND POOL ↗
  • Who funds Catherine Washburn Medical Association ↗
  • Who funds ANIMAL PROTECTION NEW MEXICO ↗
  • Who funds ROTARY CLUB OF SACRAMENTO FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds ROTARY INTL DISTRICT 5280 CHARITABLE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds American Heart Association Inc ↗

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 IncDE5.1× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Murray Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Murray Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 49 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 Murray’s filings →

    More from the funding graph