· Private foundation
The Moran Family Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k20 grants · $70k
- $10k–50k18 grants · $267k
- $50k–250k5 grants · $595k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NAVARRO COLLEGE FOUNDATION | $228,000 |
| NORTHSIDE BAPTIST CHURCH | $150,000 |
| SOUPMOBILE | $85,000 |
| SEENA MAGOWITZ FOUNDATION | $75,000 |
| NAVARRO COUNTY YOUTH EXPOSITION | $57,170 |
| COMPASSION CORSICANA | $40,000 |
| HOPE FOR THE HEART | $25,000 |
| METHODIST CHILDREN'S HOME | $20,000 |
| CHILD ADVOCATES OF NAVARRO COUNTY | $17,000 |
| UNITED WAY | $15,000 |
| WISEMAN MINISTRIES | $15,000 |
| HEART TRANSFORMATION | $15,000 |
| HOPE CENTER | $15,000 |
| LIFEWISE INC | $15,000 |
| WAREHOUSE LIVING ARTS | $10,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $868k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 94% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
62 repeat relationships — 37 still active in FY2025, 25 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $40k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- TSTHE SEENA MAGOWITZ FOUNDATION INC9× · 2017–2025 · $785k · revenue +27%
- SISOUPMOBILE INC9× · 2017–2025 · $630k · revenue +2%
- WMWISEMAN MINISTRIES INC9× · 2017–2025 · $290k · revenue +115%
Funded once
- GCGOLDEN CIRCLE SCHOLARSHIP ACCOUNTone grant, 2017 · $80k
- TCTHE CARROLL MORAN MEMORIAL SCHOLARSHIPone grant, 2023 · $50k
- SPSAMARITAN'S PURSEgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $30k · revenue +163%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
To inspire greatness and instill virtue in people of all ages by creating world-class christian entertainment
The Texas Nonprofit Hospice Alliance (TNPHA) is a group of nonprofit hospices dedicated to sharing best practices and providing quality care for individuals with life-limiting illnesses.
Organization provides services to senior citizens and the disabled, primarily through home-delivered meals and congregate meals.
Providing christ-centered recovery material and aftercare services to women across the nation who are incarcerated or who reside in addiction recovery facilitites.
El Buen Samaritano an outreach ministry of the Episcopal Diocese of Texas serving the Latino community of Central Texas is committed to recognizing the dignity of all by ensuring access to health care education and essential needs that…
National Christian Foundation North Texas (NCFNT) was created to facilitate smarter Christian giving with sophisticated charitable techniques.
To lead a unified effort for a hunger-free texas.
Established in 1934, vna helps older adults live with dignity and independence at home by providing in-home care, food and friendship for the ill, hungry, and homebound.
Hospice care of terminally ill patients
The association's purpose is to promote the role of the pharmacist and the practice of pharmacy in the state of texas.
Unbound North Texas exists to support survivors and resource the community to fight human trafficking through Survivor Advocacy, a 24/7 Drop-In Center, and Prevention and Awareness.
Texas palliative care operates to strengthen and further the goals and purpose of hospice of east texas, a texas non-profit corporation.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Lifewise Inc and the most unlike its peers is Hope for the Heart. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 27 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 26% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 15% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
31 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 31 of the 100 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds THE SEENA MAGOWITZ FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SOUPMOBILE INC ↗
- Who funds WISEMAN MINISTRIES INC ↗
- Who funds NAVARRO COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds METHODIST CHILDREN'S HOME ↗
- Who funds DONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC ↗
- Who funds THE UNITED WAY INC ↗
- Who funds HOPE FOR THE HEART ↗
- Who funds Ducks Unlimited Inc ↗
- Who funds TEXAS STATE ALUMNI ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: J Tom Eady Charitable Trust · Faye Murray & Mae Wardlaw Charitable Foundation · Pearl Thornell Charitable Foundation · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · Texas Instruments Foundation · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · American Endowment Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Network for Good · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization The Moran Family Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Moran Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Moran Family Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.