Skip to content
The May Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The May Family 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.

$60k
Granted FY2025still arriving
17
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$10k
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 2025.

Human Services$102kEducation$90kHealth$57kPublic Safety & Disaster$55kEnvironment$37kCommunity Improvement$34kFood & Nutrition$19kCivil Rights$17kOther$0
02FY2025 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k16 grants · $50k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$2,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$120k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FRIENDS OF GRAND COUNTY CHILDRENS JUSTICE CENTER$10,000
MOAB FREE HEALTH CLINIC$7,500
MOAB VALLEY MULTICULTURAL CENTER$6,500
SEEKHAVEN INC$5,000
WABISABI INC$5,000
GRAND COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOL$4,000
WELLNESS COLLECTIVE$3,000
MOAB SOLUTIONS INC$3,000
MOAB MUSIC FESTIVAL INC$2,500
CAN D AID$2,500
MOAB COMMUNITY CHILDCARE$2,500
SKY MIND RETREATS$2,000
MOAB WOMENS FESTIVAL$1,500
YOUTH GARDEN PROJECT$1,500
GRAND COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOL$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:

Its human-services grants (FY18–25, $71k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%CAN D AID: $3k → 12%WABISABI INC: $5k → 11%SEEKHAVEN INC: $5k → 11%SEEKHAVEN INC: $5k → 11%WABISABI INC: $5k → 11%WABISABI INC: $5k → 11%WABISABI INC: $5k → 11%SEEKHAVEN INC: $5k → 11%WABISABI INC: $5k → 11%MOAB COMMUNITY CHILDCARE: $5k → 11%WABISABI INC: $3k → 11%MOAB HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION INC: $3k → 11%SEEKHAVEN INC: $3k → 11%MOAB COMMUNITY CHILDCARE: $3k → 11%SEEKHAVEN INC: $2k → 11%MOAB COMMUNITY CHILDCARE: $2k → 11%SEEKHAVEN INC: $2k → 11%SEEKHAVEN INC: $2k → 11%WABISABI INC: $2k → 11%SEEKHAVEN INC: $1k → 11%MOAB HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION INC: $1k → 11%SEEKHAVEN INC: $800 → 11%WABISABI INC: $250 → 11%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.

69%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$308k · 16 repeat orgs$141k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +118% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

16 repeat relationships: 10 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
14

Total granted

$308k
$123k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+118%
0%

Still filing today

75%
57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $18k 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
Human ServicesHealthEducationEnvironmentCrime & LegalCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • MV
    MOAB VALLEY MULTICULTURAL CENTER
    8× · 2017–2025 · $56k · revenue +164%
  • MF
    MOAB FREE HEALTH CLINIC
    8× · 2017–2025 · $32k · revenue +255%
  • WI
    WABISABI INC
    7× · 2019–2025 · $30k · revenue +5%

Funded once

  • CV
    CASTLE VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
    one grant, 2021 · $50k
  • GC
    GRAND COUNTY EDUCATION FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2020 · $15k · revenue -51% · 30% of their budget
  • AM
    Active Minds Inc
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue -19%
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
Rural Idaho & Mountain West Primary Care
Health
2
Utah Geological Foundation
—
3
Bear River Mental Health Services Inc

Provide mental health services to residents of Cache, Rich, and Box Elder Counties in Utah.

Health
4
Utah Public Lands Alliance
Education
5
Economic Development Corporation of Utah Foundation

To serve as a catalyst for quality job growth and increased capital investment in the state.

Community Improvement
6
Utah Valley Chamber of Commerce

Stimulate local business establishment, growth, and development by facilitating business to business and business to community relationships throughout Utah County.

—
7
Mountain High Recovery Center

Mountain High Recovery Center is a substance use treatment facility whose mission is to provide local, quality, and affordable recovery services to individuals and families in the South Lake Tahoe, CA community.

Health
8
Mutual Aid Partners

Mutual aid partners is a network that supports and connects grassroots efforts in mesa county colorado, by facilitating communication, education, boosting collaboration and accessibility to resources & volunteers.

Community Improvement
9
Urban Indian Center of Salt Lake

To serve The People by honoring Native cultures, strengthening health and wellness programs, and cultivating community. We envision all Native peoples living balanced, prosperous, and healthy lives in diverse communities for Seven…

—
10
Our Village Community Center

As stewards of the land, our village community center cultivates togetherness and life-long learning for all ages.

Community Improvement
11
Great Basin Resource Watch

Natural resource protection: Protected communities and the environment from the negative impacts of mineral development; provided support to communities impacted by mining

Environment
12
Scenic Montana Trails
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Moab Valley Healthcare Inc; the most unlike its peers is Friends of Grand County Childrens Justice Center. 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

26 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. 26 of the 36 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
25/26
Grantees still filing
14/26
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GRAND COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOL: $78,800 · OtherGRAND COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLCASTLE VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT: $50,000 · OtherCASTLE VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICTFULL CIRCLE INTERTRIBAL CENTER: $17,000 · OtherFULL CIRCLE INTERTRIBAL CENTERLA SAL MOUNTAIN ALLIANCE: $10,000 · OtherGLENBARD TWP HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT 87: $10,000 · OtherLIVING RIVERS: $10,000 · Other+13 more: $38,560 · Other+13 moreWABISABI INC: $30,151 · Human ServicesWABISABI INCSEEKHAVEN FAMILY CRISIS CENTER INC: $25,300 · Human ServicesSEEKHAVEN FAMILY …MOAB COMMUNITY CHILDCARE: $9,000 · Human ServicesMOAB COMMUNITY CH…MOAB HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION: $4,000 · Human ServicesMOAB HEALTHCARE F…Can'd Aid: $2,500 · Human ServicesMOAB VALLEY MULTICULTURAL CENTER: $56,000 · Civil RightsMOAB VALLEY MU…MOAB FREE HEALTH CLINIC: $31,500 · HealthMOAB FREE H…Active Minds Inc: $10,000 · HealthActive Mind…MOAB VALLEY HEALTHCARE INC: $3,000 · HealthMOAB VALLEY…+1 more: $500 · HealthYOUTH GARDEN PROJECT: $16,600 · Crime & LegalFRIENDS OF GRAND COUNTY CHILDRENS JUSTICE CENTER: $10,000 · Crime & LegalGRAND COUNTY EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $14,650 · EducationSKY MIND RETREATS: $5,000 · EducationTransitions Inc: $3,000 · EducationMoab Solutions Inc: $10,000 · Community ImprovementEPICENTER: $4,000 · Community Improvement
Other$214,360Human Services$70,951Civil Rights$56,000Health$45,000Crime & Legal$26,600Education$22,650Community Improvement$14,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMOAB VALLEY MULTICULTURAL CENTER: $56,000 over 8y, 3.0% of budgetMOAB FREE HEALTH CLINIC: $31,500 over 8y, 0.7% of budgetWABISABI INC: $30,151 over 7y, 0.9% of budgetSEEKHAVEN FAMILY CRISIS CENTER INC: $25,300 over 7y, 0.5% of budgetYOUTH GARDEN PROJECT: $16,600 over 8y, 1.2% of budgetGRAND COUNTY EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $14,650 over 1y, 30% of budgetActive Minds Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLIVING RIVERS: $10,000 over 1y, 7.0% of budgetMoab Solutions Inc: $10,000 over 5y, 2.2% of budgetMOAB COMMUNITY CHILDCARE: $9,000 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetCANYONLANDS FIELD INSTITUTE INC: $5,500 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetFOUR CORNERS COMMUNITY BEHAVIORAL HEALTH INC: $5,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetSKY MIND RETREATS: $5,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetMOAB HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION: $4,000 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetEPICENTER: $4,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetColorado Healing Fund: $3,560 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTransitions Inc: $3,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetMOAB VALLEY HEALTHCARE INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCan'd Aid: $2,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE HOPE ALLIANCE: $2,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCal-Wood Education Center: $1,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGROWING GARDENS OF BOULDER COUNTY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSOUTHEAST UTAH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $250 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

Alpenglow FoundationVal a Browning Charit…Palladium FoundationLarry H Miller and Ga…George S and Dolores …Sorenson Legacy Found…Ruth Brown FoundationThe Colin D Fryer Fou…The Carl George Bjork…Dominion Energy Chari…Pacificorp Foundation…Janet Q Lawson Founda…
Alpenglow FoundationCO24.1× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Alpenglow Foundation · Val a Browning Charitable Foundation · Palladium Foundation · Larry H Miller and Gail Miller Family Foundation · George S and Dolores Dore Eccles Foundation · Sorenson Legacy Foundation · Ruth Brown Foundation · The Colin D Fryer Foundation · The Carl George Bjorkman Foundation · Dominion Energy Charitable Foundation · Pacificorp Foundation Aka Pacific Power Foundation Aka Rocky Mountain Power Foundati · Janet Q Lawson 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 The May Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The May Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%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
    13report 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 36 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 May 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