Skip to content

Pennsylvania · Private foundation

The Ruth Danley and William Enoch Moore Fund

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$1.0M
Granted FY2025(still arriving)
18
Grants FY2025
15
Organizations funded FY2024
20%
First-time grantees FY2024
Read the full brief
Median grant, FY2025
$50,000
Largest grant, FY2025
$150,000
Organizations funded a year
11 to 15
FY2017 to FY2024
States reached, FY2025
12
Total assets, FY2025
$17M
Applications
Takes unsolicited applications
Per its most recent filing; check its own site

How open it is to new grantees

In FY2024, 20% of the organizations The Ruth Danley and William Enoch Moore Fund funded were first-time grantees, receiving 18% of its grant dollars.

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 82% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $166k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’19’20’21’22’23’24
EducationArts & CultureFood & NutritionReligionEnvironmentOther
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.
The numbers by year
Fiscal yearOrganizations fundedTo those organizationsFirst-time grantees
FY2025still arriving18$1.0M44%
FY202415$916k20%
FY202312$992k0%
FY202214$1.1M29%
FY202113$871k23%
FY202011$868k18%
FY201912$870k17%
FY201712$773kn/a
98% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Education$4.6MArts & Culture$1.2MFood & Nutrition$399kHousing & Shelter$380kReligion$366kCommunity Improvement$238kYouth Development$87kHuman Services$40kOther$0

Where its grants go

Grant dollars by states, across the years we hold.

Which US states its grants reach

ID
MT
MN
NY
SD
IA
IN
NJ
CA
CO
MD
AZ
NM
OK

Top grantees

Largest recipients by total granted, FY2017 to FY2025, and the share of each one’s budget the grants supplied at peak.

GranteeTotal grantedYearsShare of their budget
Menaul School$1,078,47583%
Red Cloud Indian School$805,0008n/a
Wolakota Waldorf Society$720,481836%
St Labre Indian School$656,5007n/a
Mica Group Inc$542,039833%
Bundled Arrows Inc$338,256627%
St Michael Indian School$252,0003n/a
Red Willow Center$208,338339%
United Indian Missions Inc$205,0006n/a
Sunshine Bible Academy$194,97044%
Show all 26 grantees
All grantees of The Ruth Danley and William Enoch Moore Fund by total granted
GranteeTotal grantedYearsShare of their budget
Menaul School$1,078,47583%
Red Cloud Indian School$805,0008n/a
Wolakota Waldorf Society$720,481836%
St Labre Indian School$656,5007n/a
Mica Group Inc$542,039833%
Bundled Arrows Inc$338,256627%
St Michael Indian School$252,0003n/a
Red Willow Center$208,338339%
United Indian Missions Inc$205,0006n/a
Sunshine Bible Academy$194,97044%
Fundamental Needs Inc$190,567527%
Oyate Hope Academy$150,000179%
Oyate Concern Inc$125,000160%
Lillian Vallely School Inc$85,000222%
Seneca Nation of Indians$60,0001n/a
Lakota Language Consortium Inc$50,0001n/a
Nkwusm$50,00014%
Boys and Girls Club of Sequoyah County$50,00019%
Indian Bible College$35,56721%
Boys and Girls Club of Flagstaff$25,00013%
National Forest Foundation$20,00010%
California Indian Nations College$20,00011%
Gallup Catholic School Inc$18,0001n/a
Native American Advancement Corporation$15,00011%
Two By Two Character Development$12,00012%
Montana Wilderness School$10,00011%

What it could do for these grantees

Plus 8 recipients with no EIN on record ($1.5M), not named here.

Where it is load-bearing

The Ruth Danley and William Enoch Moore Fund supplied at least a quarter of the budget for 7 of its grantees at some point. The chart plots its 19 largest grantees; load-bearing ones sit top left.

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMenaul School: $1,078,475 over 8y, 2.7% of budgetWolakota Waldorf Society: $720,481 over 8y, 36% of budgetMica Group Inc: $542,039 over 8y, 33% of budgetBundled Arrows Inc: $338,256 over 6y, 27% of budgetRed Willow Center: $208,338 over 3y, 39% of budgetSunshine Bible Academy: $194,970 over 4y, 4.2% of budgetFundamental Needs Inc: $190,567 over 5y, 27% of budgetOyate Hope Academy: $150,000 over 1y, 79% of budgetOyate Concern Inc: $125,000 over 1y, 60% of budgetLillian Vallely School Inc: $85,000 over 2y, 22% of budgetNkwusm: $50,000 over 1y, 4.2% of budgetBoys and Girls Club of Sequoyah County: $50,000 over 1y, 9.3% of budgetIndian Bible College: $35,567 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetBoys and Girls Club of Flagstaff: $25,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetNational Forest Foundation: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCalifornia Indian Nations College: $20,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetNative American Advancement Corporation: $15,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetTwo By Two Character Development: $12,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetMontana Wilderness School: $10,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budget

Tap a dot to name the grantee.

How this is measured
Share of budget is the funder’s grant in a year over the grantee’s total revenue that year, at its highest across the years we hold; revenue is from all sources. Only grantees confirmed against their own filings, whose grants do not exceed their revenue, are plotted: the largest 19.

Nonprofits that may fit its grantmaking

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.

Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Company FoundationNC15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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.

Compare The Ruth Danley and William Enoch Moore Fund with peer funders

About The Ruth Danley and William Enoch Moore Fund

How much does The Ruth Danley and William Enoch Moore Fund give?
The Ruth Danley and William Enoch Moore Fund reported 18 grants totaling $1,015,677 in its FY2025 IRS filing. It funded between 11 and 15 organizations a year over FY2017 to FY2024.
What does The Ruth Danley and William Enoch Moore Fund fund?
By grant dollars over FY2017 to FY2025, its largest causes are Education (62%), Arts & Culture (16%), Food & Nutrition (5%).
Who are The Ruth Danley and William Enoch Moore Fund's largest grantees?
By total granted over FY2017 to FY2025: Menaul School ($1.1M), Red Cloud Indian School ($805k), Wolakota Waldorf Society ($720k).
Does The Ruth Danley and William Enoch Moore Fund fund new organizations?
In FY2024, 20% of the organizations it funded were first-time grantees.
Does The Ruth Danley and William Enoch Moore Fund accept unsolicited applications?
Its most recent filing reports that it accepts unsolicited grant applications.
Which funders back the same organizations as The Ruth Danley and William Enoch Moore Fund?
Its strongest co-funders, measured against what their size predicts, include Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Company Foundation, First Nations Development Institute, Novo Foundation.
Where is The Ruth Danley and William Enoch Moore Fund based?
The Ruth Danley and William Enoch Moore Fund is based in PA.

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 34 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 Ruth Danley and William Enoch Moore’s filings →

More from the funding graph