Skip to content
Wurzburg Fdn Warren & Marjorie at a glance

· Private foundation

Wurzburg Fdn Warren & Marjorie

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.

$216k
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$141k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

65% of Wurzburg Fdn Warren & Marjorie’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Jewish Foundation Of Memphis, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 1 organization directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.

Organizations named directly on the return

3
’19
2
’20
2
’21
3
’22
1
’23
1
’24

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
0189% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

Philanthropy$244kReligion$57kHuman Services$15kCivil Rights$5kInternational$5kHealth$2kOther$0
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $211k
$70,005
Median grant
2
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JEWISH FOUNDATION OF MEMPHIS$141,010
RENAISSANCE CHARITABLE FDN INC$70,005
TEMPLE ISRAEL$5,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY19–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 78% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%TEMPLE OHABAI SHALOM: $6k → 7%THE WORLD UNION FOR PROGRESSIVE JUDAISM: $5k → 17%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $6k → 14%MEMPHIS JEWISH HOME: $2k → 17%RENAISSANCE CHARITABLE FDN INC: $70k → 10%THE JEWISH FEDERATION OF NASHVILLE: $6k → 14%JEWISH FOUNDATION OF MEMPHIS: $141k → 17%ISRAEL CRISIS FUND: $5k → 14%MEMPHIS JEWISH FEDERATION: $12k → 17%NASHVILLE FEDERATION: $5k → 14%MEMPHIS JEWISH FEDERATION: $7k → 17%TEMPLE OHABAI SHALOM: $3k → 14%MEMPHIS JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $6k → 17%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $250 → 14%MEMPHIS JEWISH FEDERATION: $4k → 17%TEMPLE ISRAEL: $16k → 17%MEMPHIS JEWISH FEDERATION: $3k → 17%TEMPLE ISRAEL: $14k → 17%MEMPHIS JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $2k → 17%TEMPLE ISRAEL: $11k → 17%MEMPHIS JEWISH FEDERATION: $1k → 17%TEMPLE ISRAEL: $6k → 17%MEMPHIS JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $606 → 17%TEMPLE ISRAEL: $6k → 17%MEMPHIS JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $500 → 17%TEMPLE ISRAEL: $5k → 17%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.

48%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$81k · 4 repeat orgs$87k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +25% since the first grant, against +14% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
5

Total granted

$81k
$17k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+25%
+14%

Still filing today

25%
20%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 7% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $70k went to new ones.

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

  • TI
    TEMPLE ISRAEL
    6× · 2019–2024 · $57k
  • MJ
    MEMPHIS JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER
    4× · 2019–2022 · $9k · revenue +25%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    2× · 2019–2023 · $9k

Funded once

  • IC
    ISRAEL CRISIS FUND
    one grant, 2023 · $5k
  • TW
    THE WORLD UNION FOR PROGRESSIVE JUDAISM LTD
    one grant, 2022 · $5k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2023 · $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
04the grantee network

5 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. 5 of the 13 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)
5/5
Grantees still filing
5/5
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

RENAISSANCE CHARITABLE FDN INC: $70,005 · OtherRENAISSANCE CHARITABLE FDN INCTEMPLE ISRAEL: $57,165 · OtherTEMPLE ISRAELMEMPHIS JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $9,106 · OtherMEMPHIS JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERIndividual grant recipient: $8,750 · OtherJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $6,250 · Other+4 more: $15,500 · Other+4 moreJEWISH FOUNDATION OF MEMPHIS: $141,010 · ReligionJEWISH FOUNDATION OF MEMPHISMEMPHIS JEWISH FEDERATION: $26,600 · PhilanthropyMEMPHIS JE…JEWISH FEDERATION OF NASHVILLE AND MIDDLE TENNESSEE: $6,000 · PhilanthropyJEWISH FED…B'NAI B'RITH HOME AND HOSPITAL FOR AGED INC (D/B/A MEMPHIS JEWISH HOME & REHAB): $1,800 · Health
Other$166,776Religion$141,010Philanthropy$32,600Health$1,800

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetJEWISH FOUNDATION OF MEMPHIS: $141,010 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetMEMPHIS JEWISH FEDERATION: $26,600 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetMEMPHIS JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $9,106 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF NASHVILLE AND MIDDLE TENNESSEE: $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetB'NAI B'RITH HOME AND HOSPITAL FOR AGED INC (D/B/A MEMPHIS JEWISH HOME & REHAB): $1,800 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 JEWISH FOUNDATION OF MEMPHIS ↗
  • Who funds MEMPHIS JEWISH FEDERATION ↗
  • Who funds MEMPHIS JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH FEDERATION OF NASHVILLE AND MIDDLE TENNESSEE ↗
  • Who funds B'NAI B'RITH HOME AND HOSPITAL FOR AGED INC (D/B/A MEMPHIS JEWISH HOME & REHAB) ↗

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.

Magdovitz Family Foun…Reginald Wurzburg Fou…Herbert Shainberg Fou…Lichterman Loewenberg…Plough FoundationThe Goldsmith Family …Belz FoundationRaymond James Charita…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Magdovitz Family FoundationTN15.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Magdovitz Family Foundation · Reginald Wurzburg Foundation · Herbert Shainberg Foundation · Lichterman Loewenberg Foundation · Plough Foundation · The Goldsmith Family Foundation Inc · Belz Foundation · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · 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 Wurzburg Fdn Warren & Marjorie funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Wurzburg Fdn Warren & Marjorie. 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%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 13 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Wurzburg Fdn Warren & Marjorie’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