· Private foundation
The Morf 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k1 grant · $40k
- $50k–250k7 grants · $650k
- $250k+5 grants · $3.0M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NEW YORK UNIVERSITY | $1,000,000 |
| MOTION PICTURE & TELEVISION FUND | $1,000,000 |
| THE FILM FOUNDATION | $500,000 |
| CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF LOS ANGELES | $250,000 |
| FRIENDS OF THE BRITISH FILM INSTITUTE | $250,000 |
| LOS ANGELES PHILHARMONIC ASSOCIATION | $150,000 |
| UCLFAA INC | $150,000 |
| AMERICAN FILM INSTITUTE | $100,000 |
| DIRECTORS GUILD FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| MY FRIEND'S PLACE | $50,000 |
| THE AMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE ROYAL FOUNDATION | $50,000 |
| LA FAMILY HOUSING | $50,000 |
| SCHOOL FOR ETHICS AND GLOBAL LEADERSHIP | $40,000 |
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 (FY24–24, $1.0M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% 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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +40% since the first grant, against +2% for the ones you funded once.
14 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 42% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2.1M 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
- TFTHE FILM FOUNDATION INC8× · 2017–2024 · $3.8M · revenue +4% · 36% of their budget
- CHChildren's Hospital Los Angeles8× · 2017–2024 · $2.9M · revenue +78%
- LFLA FAMILY HOUSING CORPORATION8× · 2017–2024 · $1.3M · revenue +293%
Funded once
EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY SUPPORT FUND INCone grant, 2019 · $1.0M · revenue +10%- EFEVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY SUPPORTone grant, 2017 · $1.0M
- EAEMERGENCY ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2020 · $100k · revenue -55%
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.
The specific purposes for which bafta na is organized is to promote, maintain, improve and advance original and creative work among individuals employed professionally in film and television production and allied industries, to create and…
The Television Academy is dedicated to celebrating excellence, innovation and the advancement of the telecommunications arts and sciences through recognition, education and leadership, while fostering a diverse, inclusive and accessible…
The ucla foundation is the giving, receiving, and investing arm of the ucla campus. the foundation enables private donors to help build, sustain and advance one of the world's finest academic and research institutions. private philanthropy…
Siff is a seattle-based 501(c)(3) arts nonprofit dedicated to the creation of vibrant experiences and spaces that champion film discovery and arts education.
Sag-aftra members work together to secure the strongest protections for media artists.
The charitable arm of the tv academy, the academy of television arts & sciences foundation, is dedicated to preserving television while educating and inspiring future leaders.
The moving picture institute is a nonprofit production company and talent incubator that creates high-impact films designed to entertain, inspire, and educate audiences with captivating stories about human freedom.
American foreign service association (afsa) is both the principal advocate for the long-term institutional wellbeing of the professional career foreign service and responsible for safeguarding the interest of afsa members. (continued on…
The california film institute celebrates film and videos as art and education. its goal is to present and support emerging and established independent filmakers whose works address issues relevant to contemporary society. this is…
The entertainment community fund is a national human services organization that fosters stability and resiliency and provides a safety net for performing arts and entertainment professionals over their lifespan. (continued in schedule o).
To recognize and uphold excellence in the motion picture arts and sciences, inspire imagination, and connect the world through the medium of motion pictures.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Motion Picture and Television Fund and the most unlike its peers is New York University. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
16 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. 16 of the 23 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 FILM FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Children's Hospital Los Angeles ↗
- Who funds PABLOVE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds LA FAMILY HOUSING CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds BFI AMERICA ↗
- Who funds EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY SUPPORT FUND INC ↗
- Who funds MOTION PICTURE AND TELEVISION FUND ↗
- Who funds New York University ↗
- Who funds LOS ANGELES PHILHARMONIC ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds DIRECTORS GUILD FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC ↗
- Who funds THE AMERICAN FILM INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE ROYAL FOUNDATION OF THE PRINCE AND PRINCESS OF WALES ↗
- Who funds MICHIGAN THEATER FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds The School for Ethics and Global Leadership ↗
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: National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 Morf 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.