Skip to content
Craddock Ruby J - Memorial Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Craddock Ruby J - Memorial Trust

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$115k
Granted FY2025still arriving
18
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

Health$281kYouth Development$122kAnimals$120kHuman Services$68kHousing & Shelter$38kPublic Safety & Disaster$15kRecreation & Sports$10kEnvironment$6kOther$0
02FY2025 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k15 grants · $75k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $40k
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$1.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HUMANE SOCIETY OF UTAH$15,000
COMMUNITY NURSING SERVICE$15,000
BIRCH CREEK SERVICE RANCH$10,000
VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA INC$5,000
UTAH YOUTH VILLAGE$5,000
THE CHILDREN'S CENTER UTAH$5,000
DOVE CENTER$5,000
SPECIAL OLYMPICS UTAH INC$5,000
FRIENDS OF THE CHILDREN - UTAH$5,000
BIG BROTHERS-BIG SISTERS OF UTAH INC$5,000
ODYSSEY HOUSE INC-UTAH$5,000
UTAH ANIMAL ADOPTION CENTER$5,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
GIRL SCOUT OF UTAH$5,000
YWCA OF UTAH$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 (FY19–25, $80k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%LITTLE LAMBS FOUNDATION FOR KIDS INC: $8k → 12%RAISE THE FUTURE: $10k → 12%RAISE THE FUTURE: $10k → 12%RAISE THE FUTURE: $6k → 12%THE INN BETWEEN: $10k → 8%THE INN BETWEEN: $8k → 8%THE INN BETWEEN: $5k → 8%THE INN BETWEEN: $5k → 8%UTAH YOUTH VILLAGE: $5k → 8%UTAH YOUTH VILLAGE: $5k → 8%UTAH YOUTH VILLAGE: $5k → 8%UTAH YOUTH VILLAGE: $4k → 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.
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.

85%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$568k · 15 repeat orgs$96k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +46% since the first grant, against +34% for those funded once.

15 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
8

Total granted

$568k
$61k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+46%
+34%

Still filing today

80%
88%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $35k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesAnimalsYouth DevelopmentHealthRecreation & SportsArts & CultureOther
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

  • CN
    COMMUNITY NURSING SERVICE
    8× · 2018–2025 · $141k · revenue +34%
  • HS
    HUMANE SOCIETY OF UTAH
    8× · 2018–2025 · $100k · revenue +97%
  • BC
    BIRCH CREEK SERVICE RANCH
    6× · 2018–2025 · $53k · revenue +35%

Funded once

  • VO
    VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA UTAHgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue +55%
  • MM
    MENDING MINDS VILLAGE
    one grant, 2024 · $10k · 41% of their budget
  • BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETYgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue +39%
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
House of Hope

Treating substance use disorders, rebuilding lives, strengthening families, and empowering women.

—
2
The Christmas Box International

The christmas box international partners with local, national and international communities and groups to prevent child abuse and to improve the quality of life for children, teens and young adults who have been abused, neglected or are…

Community Improvement
3
Utah Foster Care Foundation Inc

We serve Utah's children by finding, educating, and nurturing families to meet the needs of children in foster care

Human Services
4
Southwest Utah Community Health Center

Making lives better in southwest utah by providing accessible, quality health care, regardless of financial, language, or cultural barriers.

Health
5
Utah Association of Family Support Centers Inc

The mission of the fscu is to strengthen utah families one community at a time by supporting parents, protecting children, and preserving families. to accomplish this mission, each family support center provides its clients with a 24-hour…

—
6
Utah Valley Family Support Center Inc

Provide services to victims and potential victims of child abuse and neglect.

—
7
Autism Foundation of Utah
Health
8
Family Promise - Salt Lake

We help families experiencing homelessness find lasting independence and security.

Housing & Shelter
9
Midwives College of Utah

Educate and train midwives to provide safe, professional, affordable and personal maternity and general health care.

Education
10
Urban Indian Center of Salt Lake

To serve The People by honoring Native cultures, strengthening health and wellness programs, and cultivating community. We envision all Native peoples living balanced, prosperous, and healthy lives in diverse communities for Seven…

—
11
Utah's Promise

Utah's promise (up) is committed to 100% of kids and families thriving. we unify leaders, partners, communities and systems to achieve that promise.

Philanthropy
12
Children's Service Society of Utah

Children's service society provides services to families, individuals and the community to enhance the safety and well-being of children and their caregivers. all the services help prevent child abuse.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Youth Futures; the most unlike its peers is Mending Minds Village. 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 30 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
25/25
Grantees still filing
15/25
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COMMUNITY NURSING SERVICE: $141,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY NURSING SERVICEEPILEPSY ASSOCIATION OF UTAH: $60,000 · OtherEPILEPSY ASSOCIATION OF UTAHTHE CHILDREN'S CENTER UTAH: $35,000 · OtherTHE CHILDREN'S CENTER UTAHYoung Women's Christian Association of Utah: $17,500 · OtherVOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA INC: $15,000 · Other+10 more: $66,480 · Other+10 moreHUMANE SOCIETY OF UTAH: $100,000 · AnimalsHUMANE SOCIETY OF U…BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $10,000 · AnimalsBEST FRIENDS ANIMAL…UTAH ANIMAL ADOPTION CENTER: $5,000 · AnimalsTHE INN BETWEEN: $27,500 · Human ServicesTHE INN BETWE…RAISE THE FUTURE: $26,000 · Human ServicesRAISE THE FUT…UTAH YOUTH VILLAGE: $19,000 · Human ServicesUTAH YOUTH VI…Little Lambs Foundation for Kids Inc: $7,500 · Human ServicesLittle Lambs …BIRCH CREEK SERVICE RANCH: $52,500 · Youth DevelopmentBIRCH CREE…FRIENDS OF THE CHILDREN - UTAH: $5,000 · Youth DevelopmentFRIENDS OF…GIRL SCOUTS OF UTAH: $5,000 · Youth DevelopmentGIRL SCOUT…YOUTH FUTURES: $27,500 · HealthMENDING MINDS VILLAGE: $10,000 · HealthEYE CARE FOR KIDS - Utah: $7,500 · HealthBig Brothers Big Sisters of Utah: $15,000 · EducationDOVE CENTER INC: $12,000 · Housing & Shelter
Other$334,980Animals$115,000Human Services$80,000Youth Development$62,500Health$45,000Education$15,000Housing & Shelter$12,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCOMMUNITY NURSING SERVICE: $141,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF UTAH: $100,000 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetBIRCH CREEK SERVICE RANCH: $52,500 over 6y, 5.2% of budgetTHE CHILDREN'S CENTER UTAH: $35,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetTHE INN BETWEEN: $27,500 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetYOUTH FUTURES: $27,500 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetRAISE THE FUTURE: $26,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetUTAH YOUTH VILLAGE: $19,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetYoung Women's Christian Association of Utah: $17,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetBig Brothers Big Sisters of Utah: $15,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetDOVE CENTER INC: $12,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetVOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA UTAH: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMENDING MINDS VILLAGE: $10,000 over 1y, 41% of budgetBUILDING YOUTH AROUND THE WORLD: $10,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetBEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEYE CARE FOR KIDS - Utah: $7,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetLittle Lambs Foundation for Kids Inc: $7,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCANYONLANDS FIELD INSTITUTE INC: $6,480 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetNATIONAL ABILITY CENTER: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE CHILDREN - UTAH: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetGIRL SCOUTS OF UTAH: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetODYSSEY HOUSE INC - UTAH: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCACHE HUMANE SOCIETY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.6% 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.

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.

George S and Dolores …Sorenson Legacy Found…Petersen Bruce & Ceci…Intermountain Communi…Utah Medical Associat…David Kelby Johnson M…Lawrence & Janet Dee …Dominion Energy Chari…McCarthey Family Foun…Ihc Health Services I…Marriner S Eccles Fou…Kennecott Utah Copper…
George S and Dolores Dore Eccles FoundationUT32.3× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: George S and Dolores Dore Eccles Foundation · Sorenson Legacy Foundation · Petersen Bruce & Cecilia Fdn-Main · Intermountain Community Care Foundation Inc · Utah Medical Association Foundation · David Kelby Johnson Memorial Foundation · Lawrence & Janet Dee Foundation · Dominion Energy Charitable Foundation · McCarthey Family Foundation · Ihc Health Services Inc · Marriner S Eccles Foundation · Kennecott Utah Copper Visitors Center Charitable 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 Craddock Ruby J - Memorial Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Craddock Ruby J - Memorial Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    11report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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 30 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 Craddock Ruby J - Memorial’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