· Private foundation
Marc C and Deborah H Bingham Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UVU Foundation | $3,500 |
| Utah Police Civilian Associations Inc | $2,000 |
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 (FY20–25, $206k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 32% of Marc C and Deborah H Bingham Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +28% since the first grant, against +2% for the ones you funded once.
13 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down.
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 FY2025, 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
- MFMaliheh Free Clinic4× · 2020–2023 · $120k · revenue +68%
- TSTHE SHARING PLACE4× · 2020–2023 · $50k · revenue +48%
- MHMountainland Head Start2× · 2021–2022 · $25k · revenue +8%
Funded once
- HCHOLBROOK COMMUNITY CENTER THE CURTIS CENTER FOR ARTS AND EDUCATIONone grant, 2023 · $200k · revenue -93%
- UCUtah's Cooperative Wildlife Managementone grant, 2023 · $75k
- UOUNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATIONone grant, 2022 · $60k · revenue +2%
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.
Provide support to the University of Utah Growth Capital Partners Foundation in Charitable, Educational and Scientific purposes.
The primary purpose of Trauma-Informed Utah is to respond to requests for education, resources and training around implementing a Trauma-Informed approach within their organization. The focus includes any and all sectors of society seeking…
BioUtah was created to elevate the stature and influence of Utahs life science community on the national and global stage. The organization serves Utahs medical device, biopharma, natural products and healthcare industries through…
We serve Utah's children by finding, educating, and nurturing families to meet the needs of children in foster care
The Utah Public Health Association (UPHA) is a statewide membership organization dedicated to improving the health of Utah communities by supporting and representing the public health workforce. UPHA advances public health through…
Fundraising for healthcare to support patient care, medical education, and clinical research for University of Utah Hospitals & Clinics and other similar nonprofit organizations.
Our mission is to help parents help their children, youth and young adults with all disabilities to live included, productive lives as members of the community.
Our Mission is to drastically minimize the generational impact of sexual violence through advocacy and healing by breaking the cycle of generational trauma through advocacy, awareness, and change.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Community Foundation of Utah and the most unlike its peers is Holbrook Community Center the Curtis Center for Arts and Education. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
22 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. 22 of the 34 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 University Impact ↗
- Who funds HOLBROOK COMMUNITY CENTER THE CURTIS CENTER FOR ARTS AND EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds Maliheh Free Clinic ↗
- Who funds Saprea ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE SHARING PLACE ↗
- Who funds PRADER-WILLI SYNDROME ASSOCIATION (USA) ↗
- Who funds Mountainland Head Start ↗
- Who funds The Rachel Covey Foundation ↗
- Who funds ATLANTIS USA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds OVERT FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Charitable Events Corporation ↗
- Who funds Kids on the Move Inc ↗
- Who funds Fight Against Domestic Violence ↗
- Who funds FUTUREINDESIGN INC ↗
- Who funds STAND4KIND ↗
- Who funds UTAH POLICE CIVILIAN ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds THE ULI FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Fight the New Drug Inc ↗
- Who funds SEAGER MEMORIAL CLINIC ↗
- Who funds The Community Foundation of Utah ↗
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: Sorenson Legacy Foundation · Larry H Miller and Gail Miller Family Foundation · George S and Dolores Dore Eccles Foundation · Joan and Tim Fenton Family Foundation · Joseph and Kathleen Sorenson Legacy Foun · Ihc Health Services Inc · The Miner Foundation · The Community Foundation of Utah · Wcf Foundation · David Kelby Johnson Memorial Foundation · Making a Difference Foundation · Val a Green & Edith D Green 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 Marc C and Deborah H Bingham 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.