Skip to content
William and Mary Singer Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

William and Mary Singer Family Foundation

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.

$125k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0188% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Education$247kHealth$234kReligion$106kHuman Services$57kArts & Culture$48kCivil Rights$31kRecreation & Sports$28kPhilanthropy$9kOther$0
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$25,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$2.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MD ANDERSON$25,000
ST JUDE$25,000
UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA FOUNDATION$25,000
ASU FOUNDATION$25,000
MATHIEU MACDONALD OUTDOOR HOOPS BASKETBALL$15,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
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 (FY20–23, $24k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, 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%BOYS TOWN: $400 → 12%JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICES OF SOUTHERN ARIZONA: $4k → 15%EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE: $10k → 15%EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE: $5k → 15%EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE: $3k → 15%EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE: $1k → 15%GABRIELS ANGELS: $500 → 15%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.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
NY
CA
UT
NE
MO
VA
MD
AZ
TN
DC
LA
TX
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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$846k · 36 repeat orgs$97k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +48% since the first grant, against +32% for those funded once.

36 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 31 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

36
30

Total granted

$846k
$72k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+48%
+32%

Still filing today

36%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesEducationAnimalsInternationalArts & CultureHealthOther
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

  • University of Arizona Foundation
    6× · 2020–2025 · $122k · revenue +54%
  • TU
    The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
    5× · 2020–2024 · $43k · revenue +57%
  • TC
    TUCSON CENTERS FOR WOMEN & CHILDREN INC DBA EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE
    4× · 2020–2023 · $19k · revenue +69%

Funded once

  • AA
    ADL ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE
    one grant, 2023 · $25k
  • WI
    WEIZMANN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE
    one grant, 2020 · $6k
  • T
    TROT
    one grant, 2024 · $5k
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
National Audubon Society Inc

We work towards a future where birds thrive across the americas because audubon is a powerful, diverse, and ever-growing force for conservation. (continued on schedule o).

Environment
2
Denver Zoological Foundation

Inspiring communities to save wildlife for future generations.

Animals
3
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
4
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
5
American Museum of Natural History

The museum's mission statement is: "to discover, interpret, and disseminate - through scientific research and education - knowledge about human cultures, the natural world, and the universe."

Arts & Culture
6
American Humane Association

Founded in 1877, american humane association, dba american humane society (american humane) is committed to ensuring the safety, welfare and well-being of animals. our leadership programs are first to serve in promoting and nurturing the…

Animals
7
The Peregrine Fund Inc

To change the future for nature and humanity by conserving birds of prey worldwide.

—
8
Animal Wellness Action

To prevent cruelty to animals, we promote enacting and enforcing good public policies. enacting good laws depends upon electing good lawmakers, and we remind voters which candidates care about and support animal issues.

Human Services
9
Banner -University Medical Group

Assist banner health complete its mission to make health care easier so life can be better by providing integrated & coordinated care & population health management.

Health
10
Sky Island Alliance

We work to connect people, wildlife, and lands across the u.s.-mexico border through the use of science, advocacy, educational activities, community engagement, and on-the-ground conservation initiatives. our main activities include…

Environment
11
Conservation Society of California

Through management of oakland zoo, the conservation society of california deepens connection with animals, saves wildlife, and inspires champions for the natural world.

Animals
12
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of Arizona Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Therapeutic Riding of Tucson Inc. 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

25 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. 25 of the 68 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
25/25
Grantees still filing
20/25
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MD ANDERSON: $175,000 · OtherMD ANDERSONST JUDE: $104,000 · OtherST JUDEASU: $90,000 · OtherASUABBIE SCHOOL: $71,000 · OtherABBIE SCHOOLAPPLEBY COLLEGE: $26,000 · OtherADL ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $25,000 · OtherRED CROSSUKRAINE: $25,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $23,000 · Other+44 more: $150,563 · Other+44 moreUniversity of Arizona Foundation: $122,000 · EducationUniversity of Ari…ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION FOR A NEW AMERICAN UNIVERSITY: $25,000 · EducationARIZONA STATE UNI…+1 more: $200 · EducationThe United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: $42,500 · Arts & Culture+1 more: $650 · Arts & CultureTUCSON CENTERS FOR WOMEN & CHILDREN INC DBA EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE: $19,000 · Human ServicesJEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICE OF SOUTHERN ARIZONA INC: $4,000 · Human ServicesGUIDE DOGS FOR THE BLIND INC: $1,000 · Human Services+2 more: $900 · Human ServicesAmerican Heart Association Inc: $12,000 · HealthALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $12,000 · HealthTherapeutic Riding of Tucson Inc: $7,700 · Recreation & SportsTucson Wildlife Center Inc: $5,500 · AnimalsBEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $1,000 · Animals+1 more: $200 · Animals
Other$689,563Education$147,200Arts & Culture$43,150Human Services$24,900Health$24,000Recreation & Sports$7,700Animals$6,700

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUniversity of Arizona Foundation: $122,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetThe United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: $42,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION FOR A NEW AMERICAN UNIVERSITY: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTUCSON CENTERS FOR WOMEN & CHILDREN INC DBA EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE: $19,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $12,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $12,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTherapeutic Riding of Tucson Inc: $7,700 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetTucson Wildlife Center Inc: $5,500 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetCommunity Food Bank Inc: $5,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $4,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICE OF SOUTHERN ARIZONA INC: $4,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFINCA INTERNATIONAL INC: $1,350 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGUIDE DOGS FOR THE BLIND INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOPERATION SMILE INC: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCASA DE LOS NINOS: $900 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetARIZONA-SONORA DESERT MUSEUM: $650 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGABRIELS ANGELS INC: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFather Flanagan's Boys' Home: $400 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SONORAN INSTITUTE INC: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOCEAN CONSERVANCY: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTucson Audubon Society: $200 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 University of Arizona Foundation ↗
  • Who funds The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum ↗
  • Who funds ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION FOR A NEW AMERICAN UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds TUCSON CENTERS FOR WOMEN & CHILDREN INC DBA EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE ↗
  • Who funds American Heart Association Inc ↗
  • Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Therapeutic Riding of Tucson Inc ↗
  • Who funds Tucson Wildlife Center Inc ↗
  • Who funds Community Food Bank Inc ↗
  • Who funds ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICE OF SOUTHERN ARIZONA 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.

Community Foundation …The Hs Lopez Family F…United Way of Tucson …American Online Givin…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Community Foundation for Southern ArizonaAZ21.8× affinity8 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation for Southern Arizona · The Hs Lopez Family Foundation · United Way of Tucson and Southern Arizona Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization William and Mary Singer Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from William and Mary Singer Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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.

    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 68 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 William and Mary Singer Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home