· Private foundation
LS Peery 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.
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 $10k6 grants · $30k
- $10k–50k10 grants · $186k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $305k
- $250k+1 grant · $1.0M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| University of Utah - Dept of Orthopaedics | $1,000,000 |
| Ogden Nature Center | $200,000 |
| Utah Open Lands | $105,000 |
| Utah Golf Foundation | $35,000 |
| Disability Law Center | $30,000 |
| The Utah Nordic Alliance | $26,000 |
| Heart & Soul | $25,000 |
| Mountain Humane (Wood River Animal Shelter) | $15,000 |
| Sageland Collaborative | $15,000 |
| Wasatch Mountain Institute | $10,000 |
| Intermountain Therapy Animals | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $10,000 |
| The Malinois Foundation | $10,000 |
| Road Dogs and Rescue | $6,000 |
| Salt Lake Film Society | $5,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $170k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +88% since the first grant, against +83% for the ones you funded once.
31 repeat relationships — 16 still active in FY2024, 15 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k 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
- GOGREATER OGDEN COMMUNITY NATURE CTR8× · 2017–2024 · $1.8M · revenue +136% · 38% of their budget
- UOUTAH OPEN LANDS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC8× · 2017–2024 · $1.7M · revenue +241%
- BCBLAINE COUNTY HUNGER COALITION INC4× · 2017–2020 · $820k · revenue +172%
Funded once
- TITHE INN BETWEENgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $50k · revenue +114%
- TOThe Other Side Academygraduatedone grant, 2022 · $35k · revenue +83%
- GSGuadalupe Schoolone grant, 2017 · $30k
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.
Summit land conservancy works with utah communities to conserve land and water for the benefit of the people and nature.
Trails Utah is dedicated to trails advocacy, planning, funding, and construction in needed areas throughout the state.
Heal utah's mission is to protect utah's environment and its people by promoting clean air, clean energy, and comprehensive solutions to radioactive and toxic waste.
Utah water ways promotes water conservation through collaboration between government, non-profit groups, and private sector partners and empowers the public to be wise stewards of this critical shared resource.
Utah Humanities collaborates with libraries, museums, historical societies, schools, colleges, and cultural and civic groups; provides capacity-building opportunities for volunteers and professionals in the cultural sector; presents…
Envision Utah is a nonpartisan public-private partnership that engages people to create and sustain communities that are beautiful, prosperous, healthy, and neighborly for current and future residents.
Our mission is to protect, connect, and enhance wildlife habitat, working lands, and community spaces in southeast idaho, now and for future generations.
Utah's hogle zoo creates champions for wildlife and is our community's gateway to animals, connecting our visitors with the natural world and engaging them in wildlife conservation action locally and worldwide.
Icl's mission is to create a conservation community and pragmatic, enduring solutions that protect and restore the air you breathe, the water you drink, and the land and wildlife you love.
United way of salt lake (uwsl) mobilizes people and resources to support basic needs and education.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Utah Nordic Alliance and the most unlike its peers is Fetch Cares. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 28 years old; the field is 13. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 25% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
28 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. 28 of the 48 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.
- Who funds GREATER OGDEN COMMUNITY NATURE CTR ↗
- Who funds UTAH OPEN LANDS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds BLAINE COUNTY HUNGER COALITION INC ↗
- Who funds DISABILITY LAW CENTER ↗
- Who funds HEART & SOUL ↗
- Who funds UTAH GOLF FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LATINOS IN ACTION INC ↗
- Who funds UTAH'S PROMISE ↗
- Who funds THE UTAH NORDIC ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds Intermountain Therapy Animals ↗
- Who funds Wasatch Homeless Health Care ↗
- Who funds WOOD RIVER LAND TRUST CO ↗
- Who funds SOUTH SUMMIT TRAILS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Girls on the Run of Southern Idaho Inc ↗
- Who funds THE INN BETWEEN ↗
- Who funds GLEN CANYON INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds The Other Side Academy ↗
- Who funds THE SALT LAKE FILM SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds Junior Achievement of Utah & Idaho ↗
- Who funds Sageland Collaborative ↗
- Who funds THE DIGDEEP RIGHT TO WATER PROJECT ↗
- Who funds WASATCH MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds SEGO LILY SCHOOL ↗
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: George S and Dolores Dore Eccles Foundation · The Community Foundation of Utah · Larry H Miller and Gail Miller Family Foundation · Sorenson Legacy Foundation · Willard L Eccles Charitable Foundation · Lawrence & Janet Dee Foundation · Dominion Energy Charitable Foundation · Hemingway Foundation · David Kelby Johnson Memorial Foundation · Park City Community Foundation · Union Pacific Foundation · SJ and Jessie E Quinney 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 LS Peery Foundation 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 LS Peery Foundation?
Find your warmest path to LS Peery Foundation 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.