· Private foundation
The Ruth Danley and William Enoch Moore Fund
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
- $10k–50k8 grants · $156k
- $50k–250k10 grants · $859k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| OYATE HOPE ACADEMY | $150,000 |
| MENAUL SCHOOL | $125,000 |
| RED CLOUD INDIAN SCHOOL INC | $120,000 |
| ST LABRE INDIAN SCHOOL | $112,500 |
| LAKOTA WALDORF SOCIETY | $75,951 |
| MICA GROUP INC | $65,000 |
| ST MARY'S MISSION SCHOOL | $60,856 |
| FUNDAMENTAL NEEDS INC | $50,000 |
| BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF SEQUOYAH COUNTY | $50,000 |
| BUNDLED ARROWS INC | $50,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $30,000 |
| BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF FLAGSTAFF | $25,000 |
| CALIFORNIA INDIAN NATIONS COLLEGE | $20,000 |
| INDIAN BIBLE COLLEGE | $20,000 |
| NATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION | $20,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 25%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 79% of your 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +49% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
19 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 8 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, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $306k 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
- WWWOLAKOTA WALDORF SOCIETY8× · 2017–2025 · $720k · revenue +49% · 36% of their budget
- MGMICA GROUP INC8× · 2017–2025 · $542k · revenue ×15 · 33% of their budget
- BABUNDLED ARROWS INC6× · 2019–2025 · $338k · revenue +67% · 27% of their budget
Funded once
- OCOYATE CONCERN INCone grant, 2024 · $125k · revenue 0% · 60% of their budget
- SNSENECA NATION OF INDIANSone grant, 2022 · $60k
- LLLAKOTA LANGUAGE CONSORTIUM INCgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $50k · revenue +29%
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 build academic achievement and foster healthy development of the whole child in an intertribal environment.
To create transformative learning experiences that empower a diverse community of students to lead lives of intellectual curiosity, personal integrity, and compassionate contribution to a more just world.
The mission of Native American Christian Academy is to provide an educational environment that brings the students to use the best of their ability. Moral and ethical development, life skills, social interaction are all addressed in…
To provide education and instruction in the scholarly study and preservation of indian art to empower creativity and leadership in native arts and cultures through higher education, life-long learning and outreach.
To provide postsecondary educational opportunities to meet the academic, vocational, and cultural needs of native american communities in the northwest and to provide education programs in order to promote indigenous self-determination and…
Little priest tribal college is established as an educational institution by the winnebago tribe of nebraska to fulfill the goal of its namesake, chief little priest, "be strong and educate my children".
The mission which emanates from the charter of the oglala sioux tribe is to educate students for professional and vocational employment opportunities in lakota country. the college will graduate well-rounded students grounded in…
To provide higher education opportunities, at the community college level, including vocational and technical training. as a tribal community college, we emphasize the teaching and learning of dakota culture and language toward the…
Dynamic Salish language revitalization powering cultural renewal and building a stronger, healthier community.
Provide educational and residential opportunities for native american children in grades 7-12.
Provide a liberal arts education with globally focused endeavors to provide an intellectually stimulating environment, promoting student competencies in communication, as well as critical and analytical thinking.
Yuba River Charter School provides K-8 public Waldorf education that nurtures the physical, emotional and intellectual capacities of the child through a developmentally appropriate curriculum. YRCS brings forth the academic, social,…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wolakota Waldorf Society and the most unlike its peers is Sunshine Bible Academy. 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 23 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
20 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. 20 of the 34 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 MENAUL SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds WOLAKOTA WALDORF SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds MICA GROUP INC ↗
- Who funds BUNDLED ARROWS INC ↗
- Who funds Red Willow Center ↗
- Who funds Sunshine Bible Academy ↗
- Who funds Fundamental Needs Inc ↗
- Who funds OYATE HOPE ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds OYATE CONCERN INC ↗
- Who funds LILLIAN VALLELY SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF SEQUOYAH COUNTY ↗
- Who funds LAKOTA LANGUAGE CONSORTIUM INC ↗
- Who funds NKWUSM ↗
- Who funds INDIAN BIBLE COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF FLAGSTAFF ↗
- Who funds California Indian Nations College ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Native American Advancement Corporation ↗
- Who funds Two By Two Character Development ↗
- Who funds MONTANA WILDERNESS SCHOOL ↗
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: Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Company Foundation · First Nations Development Institute · Novo Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
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 Ruth Danley and William Enoch Moore Fund 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.
- Native American Advancement Corporation — 35% of income from government
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.