Skip to content

· Private foundation

Caldwell Family Foundation

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.

$31k
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$11k
Largest
01What it funds
0189% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Health$667kPhilanthropy$117kInternational$110kEducation$51kArts & Culture$45kHuman Services$39kRecreation & Sports$29kFood & Nutrition$14kOther$0
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k3 grants · $20k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $11k
$9,608
Median grant
3
States reached
$213k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UTAH FOSTER CARE$11,000
UNIVERSITY OF UTAH$9,608
UNIVERSITY OF DENVER$5,500
SARASOTA MEMORIAL HEALTHCARE FOUND$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:

Its human-services grants (FY18–24, $40k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%HIRSCH SMILES FOUNDATION: $1k → 8%UTAH FOSTER CARE: $18k → 8%UTAH FOSTER CARE: $11k → 8%UTAH FOSTER CARE: $10k → 8%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

VT
NY
CT
CA
UT
CO
MO
VA
TN
OK
TX
FL
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.
$1.0M · 9 repeat orgs$116k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
17

Total granted

$1.0M
$110k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+47%
+84%

Still filing today

56%
18%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 82% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthHuman ServicesInternationalPhilanthropyCrime & LegalEducationOther
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

  • ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $623k · revenue +145%
  • TH
    THANKSGIVING HEROES SLC
    3× · 2018–2020 · $116k · revenue +263% · 35% of their budget
  • UF
    Utah Foster Care Foundation Inc
    3× · 2022–2024 · $39k · revenue +28%

Funded once

  • UL
    UTAH LACROSS FOUNDERS CLUB
    one grant, 2018 · $28k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $25k
  • FH
    FOR HIS GLORY INC
    one grant, 2019 · $10k
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
Denver Police Foundation

To act as an independent and unique funding and advocacy resource for the denver police department to enhance public safety and law enforcement in the denver community.

Human Services
2
University Hospital Foundation

Fundraising for healthcare to support patient care, medical education, and clinical research for University of Utah Hospitals & Clinics and other similar nonprofit organizations.

Philanthropy
3
Uc Santa Cruz Foundation

To benefit the university of california santa cruz.

Education
4
Slco Pfs 1 Inc

Promote certain pay for success programs within the community which assist the underprivileged including without limitation prisoners, women and children, and the homeless, and lessening the burdens of government.

—
5
Roseman University of Health Sciences

Roseman university of health sciences advances the health and wellness of the communities we serve by educating current and future generations of health professionals, conducting research and providing patient care. we actively pursue…

Education
6
University of South Florida Foundation Inc

University of South Florida Foundation, Inc.'s mission is to provide charitable and educational aid to the University of South Florida; to promote education and other related activities of the University; and to encourage research,…

Education
7
Utah Foundation

Utah foundation's mission is to produce objective, thorough and well- reasoned research and analysis that promotes the effective use of public resources, a thriving economy, a well-prepared workforce and a high quality of life for utahns.…

Public Benefit
8
Samuel Waxman Cancer Research Foundation

The samuel waxman cancer research foundation (the "foundation") funds innovative research to bring faster cures to patients. in addition to supporting ongoing collaborative research in specific cancers, our scientists are investigating the…

—
9
Scottsdale Police Foundation Inc

Scottsdale police foundation (spf) is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization that raises funds to support and supplement scottsdale police department programs and initiatives.

Crime & Legal
10
Hansen Scholars Support Foundation

Provide financial support to utah state university.

Education
11
Minnesota State Bar Foundation

The minnesota state bar foundation mobilizes legal community philanthropy to achieve access to justice for all minnesotans.

Crime & Legal
12
Childrens Cancer Therapy Development Institute

To make all childhood cancers universally survivable by delivering new treatments to clinical trials through scientific discovery.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Copper Club Inc; the most unlike its peers is Thanksgiving Heroes Slc. 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

9 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. 9 of the 27 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
8/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $622,962 · HealthST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC+1 more: $19,186 · HealthUNIVERSITY OF UTAH: $91,026 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF UTAHINTEGRITY FOUNDATION: $50,000 · OtherINTEGRITY FOUNDATIONUTAH LACROSS FOUNDERS CLUB: $27,500 · OtherUTAH LACROSS FOUNDERS CLUBIndividual grant recipient: $25,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientSARASOTA MEMORIAL HEALTHCARE FOUND: $15,000 · OtherSARASOTA MEMORIAL HEALTHCA…FOR HIS GLORY INC: $10,100 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · Other+11 more: $35,264 · Other+11 moreTHANKSGIVING HEROES SLC: $116,000 · PhilanthropyTHANKSGIVIN…NO BARRIERS USA: $58,000 · InternationalUtah Foster Care Foundation Inc: $38,500 · Human Services+1 more: $1,000 · Human ServicesSARASOTA POLICE FOUNDATION INC: $8,000 · Crime & LegalUNIVERSITY OF DENVER: $5,500 · EducationTHE KELLY S BRUSH FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 · Recreation & Sports
Health$642,148Other$263,890Philanthropy$116,000International$58,000Human Services$39,500Crime & Legal$8,000Education$5,500Recreation & Sports$1,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $622,962 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHANKSGIVING HEROES SLC: $116,000 over 3y, 35% of budgetNO BARRIERS USA: $58,000 over 6y, 0.5% of budgetUtah Foster Care Foundation Inc: $38,500 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetTHE COPPER CLUB INC: $19,186 over 3y, 2.0% of budgetSARASOTA POLICE FOUNDATION INC: $8,000 over 1y, 10% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF DENVER: $5,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHIRSCHE SMILES FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetTHE KELLY S BRUSH FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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 ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC ↗
  • Who funds THANKSGIVING HEROES SLC ↗
  • Who funds NO BARRIERS USA ↗
  • Who funds Utah Foster Care Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds THE COPPER CLUB INC ↗
  • Who funds SARASOTA POLICE FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF DENVER ↗
  • Who funds HIRSCHE SMILES FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE KELLY S BRUSH FOUNDATION 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.

Network for GoodDC8.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Network for Good · 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 Caldwell Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Caldwell Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 27 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 Caldwell Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph