· Public charity
And Justice for All
Increase access to civil legal services for the disadvantaged in utah.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k1 grant · $8k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $48k
- $250k+3 grants · $4.4M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UTAH LEGAL SERVICES | $2,032,051 |
| LEGAL AID SOCIETY - SALT LAKE | $1,389,127 |
| DISABILITY LAW CENTER | $962,837 |
| UTAH DISPUTE RESOLUTION | $20,000 |
| CATHOLIC COMMUNITY SERVICES | $16,000 |
| HOLY CROSS MINISTRIES | $12,000 |
| TIMPANOGOS LEGAL CENTER | $8,000 |
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% 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.
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.
9 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- ULUTAH LEGAL SERVICES INC8× · 2017–2024 · $5.9M · revenue +1%
- LALEGAL AID SOCIETY OF SALT LAKE8× · 2017–2024 · $3.9M · revenue +92% · 57% of their budget
- DLDISABILITY LAW CENTER8× · 2017–2024 · $2.0M · revenue +14%
Funded once
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.
Increase access to civil legal services for the disadvantaged in utah.
Utah Homicide Survivors provides holistic legal representation to families of homicide victims.
Provides free legal representation for victims of crime including providing information, support, and advocacy for victims as they go through the criminal justice process.
To educate utah trial lawyers and promote professionalism, to uphold and defend the constitutions of the usa and utah.
Idaho legal aid services inc is a statewide nonprofit law firm dedicated to providing equal access for low-income people through quality advocacy and education
Democracy Means Equality, Freedom & Justice: It means having a representative government. UDC is here to transform Utah politics and ensure that every voice counts.
To help people clear their criminal records and access opportunities. we will do this by: 1) spreading the word about utah's clean slate law to individuals with records, so they are aware of the law and its positive impact on their lives;…
To represent lawyers in the State of Utah and Serve the public and the legal profession by promoting justice, professional excellence, civility, ethics, respect for and understanding of the law.
Texas Legal Services Center is a nonprofit legal aid organization whose mission is to serve the undeserved by making civil justice accessible to every Texan--no matter their ability to earn. We're a coalition of attorneys, paralegals, pro…
Advance fairness, opportunity, and inclusion in the legal profession.
To promote equal access to justice and improve the lives of low-income clients through quality legal assistance
Community legal services is a non-profit law firm committed to increasing fairness in the civil justice system by advocating, litigating, and educating on behalf of arizonas most underserved communities.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Utah Legal Services Inc and the most unlike its peers is Peoples Legal Aid. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
8 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. 8 of the 9 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.
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: Utah Bar Foundation · George S and Dolores Dore Eccles Foundation · 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 And Justice for All 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to And Justice for All?
Find your warmest path to And Justice for All 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.