Skip to content
Sam and Gail Murdough Family Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Sam and Gail Murdough Family Foundation Inc

Its FY2020 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$17k
Granted FY2020
8
Grants FY2020
2
States reached
$5k
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, FY2017 to 2020.

Health$66kPublic Benefit$61kReligion$38kPhilanthropy$32kEducation$31kEnvironment$30kHousing & Shelter$10kArts & Culture$6kOther$0
02FY2020 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CAPITAL RESEARCH CENTER$5,000
SQUAM LAKES NATURAL SCIENCE CENTER$2,500
LOON PRESERVATION COMMITTEE$2,500
CHOCOURA CHAPEL ASSOC$2,000
CARDIGAN MOUNTAIN SCHOOL$2,000
SQUAM LAKES ASSOCIATION$1,000
WRIGHT MUSEUM$1,000
LAKES REGION CONSV TRUST$852
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 (FY17–19, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%UNITED SOUTH END SETTLEMENTS: $1k → 16%UNITED SOUTH END SETTLEMENTS: $1k → 16%UNITED SOUTH END SETTLEMENTS: $1k → 16%HOPE FOR FAMILIES CENTER: $4k → 12%HOPE FOR FAMILIES CENTER: $2k → 12%HOPE FOR FAMILIES CENTER: $2k → 12%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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$258k · 31 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

31 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2020, 23 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

31
0

Total granted

$258k
$0

Still filing today

48%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2020, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20
EnvironmentPublic BenefitEducationHuman ServicesPhilanthropyArts & CultureOther
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

  • CR
    CAPITAL RESEARCH CENTER
    4× · 2017–2020 · $31k · revenue +196%
  • JUDICIAL WATCH INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $28k · revenue +141%
  • SL
    SQUAM LAKES NATURAL SCIENCE CENTER
    4× · 2017–2020 · $16k · revenue +38%

Funded once

    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
    Institute for Conservation Leadership

    To support healthy communities and a healthy earth, the institute for conservation leadership strengthens leaders, organizations, coalitions and networks.

    Community Improvement
    2
    Eastern National

    Eastern national promotes the public's understanding and support of america's national parks and other public trust partners by providing quality educational experiences, products and services.

    Recreation & Sports
    3
    Conservation Legacy

    Conservation legacy engages future leaders who protect, restore, and enhance our nation's lands through community-based service.in 2024, conservation legacy engaged 2,524 participants who completed over 1.5 million service hours on public…

    Youth Development
    4
    Nantucket Conservation Foundation Inc

    The nantucket conservation foundation owns, protects, and stewards over 9,000 acres of land and coastal shoreline, conserves nantucket's rare and significant natural resources, and engages in impactful ecological research to inform…

    Environment
    5
    Lake Champlain Land Trust Inc

    The mission of the lake champlain land trust is to save the scenic beauty, natural communities, and recreational amenities of lake champlain by permanently preserving significant islands, shoreline areas, and natural communities in the…

    Environment
    6
    Environmental Investigation Agency

    To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

    International
    7
    Saint Anselm College

    Saint anselm is a catholic, benedictine college providing all of its students a distinctive liberal arts education that incorporates opportunities for professional and career preparation. it does so in a learning community that encourages…

    Education
    8
    Native Plant Trust Inc

    The organization's mission is to conserve and promote new england's native plants to ensure healthy, biologically diverse landscapes.

    Environment
    9
    Connecticut Farmland Trust Inc

    Protect Connecticuts farmland for agricultural use by purchasing and accepting donations of agricultural conservation easements

    Food & Nutrition
    10
    Minnesota Land Trust

    The minnesota land trust protects and restores minnesota's most vital natural lands in order to provide wildlife habitat, clean water, outdoor experiences and scenic beauty for generations to come.

    Environment
    11
    Natural History Institute

    Natural History Institute is organized to provide leadership and resources for a revitalized practice of natural history that integrates art, science, and humanities to promote the health and well-being of humans and the rest of the…

    Arts & Culture
    12
    Wilton Land Conservation Trust

    Protecting, enhancing and conserving open spaces encompassing meadows, woodlands, wetlands, and waterways in the town of wilton ct.

    Environment
    How this is measured
    The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Heritage Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Hillsdale College. 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

    17 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

    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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 17 of the 33 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)
    7
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    17/17
    Grantees still filing
    16/17
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    IWMF INTERNAT WALDENSTROMS MACROGLO: $30,000 · OtherIWMF INTERNAT WALDENSTROMS MACROGLOIR MEDICAL CENTER: $30,000 · OtherIR MEDICAL CENTERFIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH: $30,000 · OtherFIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCHCHOCOURA CHAPEL ASSOC: $7,500 · OtherCHOCOURA CHAPEL ASSOCDOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS: $5,500 · Other+12 more: $29,852 · Other+12 moreLeadership Institute: $28,500 · Public BenefitLeadership InstituteJUDICIAL WATCH INC: $28,000 · Public BenefitJUDICIAL WATCH INCTHE HERITAGE FOUNDATION: $4,000 · Public BenefitTHE HERITAGE FOUNDATIONCAPITAL RESEARCH CENTER: $31,000 · PhilanthropyCAPITAL RESE…SQUAM LAKES NATURAL SCIENCE CENTER: $15,500 · EnvironmentSQUAM LAKES…Loon Preservation Committee: $4,000 · EnvironmentLoon Preser…SQUAM LAKES ASSOCIATION: $4,000 · EnvironmentSQUAM LAKES…ENVIRONMENTAL LEARNING CENTER INC: $3,000 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENT…INDIAN RIVER LAND TRUST INC: $1,500 · EnvironmentINDIAN RIVE…EVANSTON TOWNSHIP HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT 202 ED FOUNDATION: $12,500 · EducationCARDIGAN MOUNTAIN SCHOOL: $9,000 · EducationHILLSDALE COLLEGE: $1,000 · EducationTHE HOPE FOR FAMILIES CENTER INC: $6,500 · Human ServicesUNITED SOUTH END SETTLEMENTS: $3,000 · Human ServicesRIVERSIDE THEATRE INC: $2,000 · Arts & CultureConcord Hospital Inc: $1,500 · Health
    Other$132,852Public Benefit$60,500Philanthropy$31,000Environment$28,000Education$22,500Human Services$9,500Arts & Culture$2,000Health$1,500

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

    25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCAPITAL RESEARCH CENTER: $31,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetLeadership Institute: $28,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetJUDICIAL WATCH INC: $28,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSQUAM LAKES NATURAL SCIENCE CENTER: $15,500 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetCARDIGAN MOUNTAIN SCHOOL: $9,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE HOPE FOR FAMILIES CENTER INC: $6,500 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetTHE HERITAGE FOUNDATION: $4,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSQUAM LAKES ASSOCIATION: $4,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL LEARNING CENTER INC: $3,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetUNITED SOUTH END SETTLEMENTS: $3,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetRIVERSIDE THEATRE INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetINDIAN RIVER LAND TRUST INC: $1,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetConcord Hospital Inc: $1,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetGRANITE UNITED WAY: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHILLSDALE COLLEGE: $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.

    • Who funds CAPITAL RESEARCH CENTER ↗
    • Who funds Leadership Institute ↗
    • Who funds JUDICIAL WATCH INC ↗
    • Who funds SQUAM LAKES NATURAL SCIENCE CENTER ↗
    • Who funds EVANSTON TOWNSHIP HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT 202 ED FOUNDATION ↗
    • Who funds CARDIGAN MOUNTAIN SCHOOL ↗
    • Who funds THE HOPE FOR FAMILIES CENTER INC ↗
    • Who funds THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION ↗
    • Who funds Loon Preservation Committee ↗
    • Who funds SQUAM LAKES ASSOCIATION ↗
    • Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL LEARNING CENTER INC ↗
    • Who funds UNITED SOUTH END SETTLEMENTS ↗
    • Who funds RIVERSIDE THEATRE INC ↗
    • Who funds INDIAN RIVER LAND TRUST INC ↗
    • Who funds Concord Hospital Inc ↗
    • Who funds GRANITE UNITED WAY ↗
    • Who funds HILLSDALE COLLEGE ↗

    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.

    New Hampshire Charita…Boston Foundation IncThe Grossman Family C…Mathieson Family Foun…The Schifrin Foundati…The Orchard FoundationLovett-Woodsum Founda…Tosa FoundationThe Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…American Endowment Fo…
    New Hampshire Charitable FoundationNH17.3× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: New Hampshire Charitable Foundation · Boston Foundation Inc · The Grossman Family Charitable Foundation · Mathieson Family Foundation · The Schifrin Foundation Inc · The Orchard Foundation · Lovett-Woodsum Foundation Inc · Tosa Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment 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 Sam and Gail Murdough Family Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Sam and Gail Murdough Family Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

    2024
    ’20’21’22’23’24’25
    no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
    • Indian River Land Trust Inc: 0% of income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get 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 · 0–75%
    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 33 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 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Sam and Gail Murdough Family’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