Skip to content

· Private foundation

The MORF Foundation Inc

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.

$46k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$11k
Largest
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 2024.

Education$156kAnimals$145kHealth$27kArts & Culture$25kRecreation & Sports$20kHuman Services$15kCivil Rights$13kFood & Nutrition$7kOther$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k6 grants · $25k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $21k
$5,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$659k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FOCUSED KIDS$10,500
NOISE FOR NOW$10,000
Zamorano University Foundation$7,761
THE FOOD DEPOT$5,000
ASPEN WALDORF FOUNDATION$4,500
LIFT UP$4,000
ARNOT ART MUSEUM$2,000
La Clinica Del Pueblo$2,000
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.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY22–25, $6k) 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%THE BRIGID ALLIANCE: $1k → 17%THE FOOD DEPOT: $5k → 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.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$396k · 17 repeat orgs$74k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +49% since the first grant, against +42% for those funded once.

17 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 13 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
15

Total granted

$396k
$57k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+49%
+42%

Still filing today

47%
47%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 63% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $17k 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
EducationHuman ServicesHealthRecreation & SportsArts & CultureEnvironmentOther
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

  • NF
    NOISE FOR NOW
    2× · 2024–2025 · $20k · revenue +49%
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF STEWART PARK INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $20k · revenue +152%
  • Cornell University
    2× · 2017–2018 · $15k · revenue +59%

Funded once

  • EZ
    EAP ZAMORANO UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2022 · $25k
  • VA
    VIEW ARTS CENTER
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
  • TA
    THE ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL FOR MATH AND SCIENCEgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $5k · revenue +28%
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
Site Santa Fe

Guided by artists, rooted in new mexico, site santa fe celebrates contemporary creative expression.

Arts & Culture
2
Community Foundation of Southern New Mexico

The Community Foundation of Southern New Mexico serves as a community resource, connects donors to needs, and supports charitable organizations in their work.

Philanthropy
3
Colorado Museum of Natural History

Be a catalyst! Ignite our community's passion for nature and science.

Arts & Culture
4
Arbor Research Collaborative for Health

Arbor research collaborative for health is committed to improving patient care through research that shapes medical policies and practice. in particular, arbor research conducts health outcomes research on chronic disease and end-stage…

Health
5
Cuenca Los Ojos

Cuenca los ojos works to preserve and restore the biodiversity of the us/mexican borderlands through land protection, habitat restoration and wildlife reintroduction.

Environment
6
Santa Fe Conservation Trust

The santa fe conservation trust partners with our community to keep northern new mexico's living lands and people flourishing together. we protect culturally and environmentally significant landscapes, ignite people's passion for nature…

Environment
7
Wild Rockies Field Institute Inc

To broaden the nature of a liberal arts education; teach critical thinking about social & environmental issues; foster understanding of & respect for natural & human communities; & cultivate a sense of place that encourages personal,…

Education
8
Womens Resource Center in Durango

Womens Resource Center (WRC) in Durango connects women and girls to the resources and programming that will help them reach their full potential in all states of their life.

—
9
Bold Futures Nm

Bold futures nm leads policy change, research, place-based organizing, and culture shift by and for women and people of color in new mexico. bold futures nm centers the lived experiences and expertise of those most impacted by an issue,…

Human Services
10
Santa Fe Community Foundation

The santa fe community foundation inspires philanthropic generosity, strengthens nonprofits, and fosters positive change to build a more vibrant, healthy, and resilient region. the foundation's vision is a thriving northern new mexico,…

Philanthropy
11
Water Protector Legal Collective

The water protector legal collective is an indigenous-led legal nonprofit that provides support and advocacy for indigenous peoples and original nations, the earth, and climate justice movements.

Crime & Legal
12
Aspen Valley Land Trust

Protecting the open land and special places of the roaring fork and middle colorado river valleys for wildlife, agriculture, and community forever.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Community Foundation of Herkimer and Oneida Counties Inc; the most unlike its peers is Indigenous Women Rising Indigeous Women Rising. 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

18 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. 18 of the 37 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/18
Grantees still filing
14/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CORNELL LAB OF ORNITHOLOGY: $145,000 · OtherCORNELL LAB OF ORNITHOLOGYZAMORANO UNIVERSITY: $101,800 · OtherZAMORANO UNIVERSITYEAP ZAMORANO UNIVERSITY: $25,000 · OtherEAP ZAMORANO UNIVERSITYARNOT OGDEN MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION INC: $20,000 · OtherARNOT OGDEN MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION INC+22 more: $74,011 · Other+22 moreCornell University: $15,000 · EducationASPEN WALDORF FOUNDATION INC: $7,500 · EducationTHE ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL FOR MATH AND SCIENCE: $5,000 · EducationNOISE FOR NOW: $20,000 · HealthLA CLINICA DEL PUEBLO INC: $2,000 · HealthFRIENDS OF STEWART PARK INC: $20,000 · Recreation & SportsARNOT ART MUSEUM: $14,000 · Arts & CultureFOCUSEDKIDS: $13,000 · Youth DevelopmentTHE FOOD DEPOT: $5,000 · Human ServicesNew Mexico Childrens Foundation: $2,000 · Human ServicesTHE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC: $1,250 · Human Services
Other$365,811Education$27,500Health$22,000Recreation & Sports$20,000Arts & Culture$14,000Youth Development$13,000Human Services$8,250

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNOISE FOR NOW: $20,000 over 2y, 4.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF STEWART PARK INC: $20,000 over 2y, 3.3% of budgetARNOT OGDEN MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetCornell University: $15,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetARNOT ART MUSEUM: $14,000 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetFOCUSEDKIDS: $13,000 over 2y, 2.3% of budgetASPEN WALDORF FOUNDATION INC: $7,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL FOR MATH AND SCIENCE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCONTIGO IMMIGRANT JUSTICE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetTHE FOOD DEPOT: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Finger Lakes Land Trust Inc: $4,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetNew Mexico Childrens Foundation: $2,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetRoaring Fork Outdoor Volunteers: $1,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetINDIGENOUS WOMEN RISING INDIGEOUS WOMEN RISING: $1,250 over 1y, 5.6% of budgetTHE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC: $1,250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOBALT FOUNDATION: $1,250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF HERKIMER AND ONEIDA COUNTIES INC: $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 NOISE FOR NOW ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF STEWART PARK INC ↗
  • Who funds ARNOT OGDEN MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Cornell University ↗
  • Who funds ARNOT ART MUSEUM ↗
  • Who funds FOCUSEDKIDS ↗
  • Who funds ASPEN WALDORF FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds THE ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL FOR MATH AND SCIENCE ↗
  • Who funds CONTIGO IMMIGRANT JUSTICE ↗
  • Who funds THE FOOD DEPOT ↗
  • Who funds The Finger Lakes Land Trust Inc ↗
  • Who funds New Mexico Childrens Foundation ↗
  • Who funds LA CLINICA DEL PUEBLO INC ↗
  • Who funds Roaring Fork Outdoor Volunteers ↗
  • Who funds INDIGENOUS WOMEN RISING INDIGEOUS WOMEN RISING ↗
  • Who funds THE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC ↗
  • Who funds COBALT FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF HERKIMER AND ONEIDA COUNTIES 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.

National Philanthropic TrustPA6.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 The MORF Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The MORF Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The MORF Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to The MORF Foundation Inc 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.

    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 37 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 MORF’s filings →

    More from the funding graph