Skip to content

· Private foundation

Phil Smith Family Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$123k
Granted FY2024still arriving
13
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$39k
Largest
01What it funds
0180% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2024.

Education$338kHealth$195kYouth Development$101kHuman Services$77kEmployment$3kEnvironment$810Other$0
02FY2024 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k10 grants · $40k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $83k
$5,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY$38,652
WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY$33,381
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB$11,070
DISABLED AMERICAN VETERANS$9,711
YOUTH IMPACT$7,601
Individual grant recipient$5,815
WOUNDED WARRIORS$5,000
Individual grant recipient$2,872
CROSSROADS OF THE WEST$2,645
WEBER SCHOOL FOUNDATION$2,475
Individual grant recipient$1,920
SHRINERS CHILDREN HOSPITAL$920
OGDEN NATURE CENTER$810
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY18–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 1% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%CURE ALZHEIMERS: $4k → 11%CHRONS & COLITIS FOUNDATION: $4k → 17%AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $39k → 8%BOYS & GIRLS CLUB: $17k → 9%AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $30k → 8%BOYS & GIRLS CLUB: $14k → 9%AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $30k → 8%YOUTH IMPACT: $13k → 9%AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $24k → 8%BOYS & GIRLS CLUB: $11k → 9%AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $24k → 8%YOUTH IMPACT: $10k → 9%AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $19k → 8%BOYS & GIRLS CLUB: $9k → 9%AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $18k → 8%BOYS & GIRLS CLUB: $8k → 9%DISABLED AMERICAN VETS: $12k → 8%YOUTH IMPACT: $8k → 9%DISABLED AMERICAN VETS: $9k → 8%YOUR COMMUNITY: $6k → 9%DISABLED AMERICAN VETS: $9k → 8%BOYS & GIRLS CLUB: $6k → 9%DISABLED AMERICAN VETS: $5k → 8%OGDEN JETS: $3k → 9%DISABLED AMERICAN VETS: $4k → 8%ENABLE UTAH: $2k → 9%WOUNDED WARRIORS: $12k → 8%MIDTOWN COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER: $1k → 9%WOUNDED WARRIORS: $12k → 8%YOUR COMMUNITY: $1k → 9%WOUNDED WARRIORS: $9k → 8%WOUNDED WARRIORS: $9k → 8%WOUNDED WARRIORS: $9k → 8%WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY: $88k → 9%WOUNDED WARRIORS: $7k → 8%WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY: $47k → 9%WOUNDED WARRIORS: $5k → 8%WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY: $47k → 9%WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY: $45k → 9%UT DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS: $4k → 8%WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY: $36k → 9%WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY: $34k → 9%WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY: $33k → 9%CROSSROADS OF THE WEST: $3k → 9%CROSSROADS OF THE WEST: $2k → 9%ADAPTIVE SPORTS: $2k → 9%WEBER SCHOOL FOUNDATION: $6k → 9%WEBER SCHOOL FOUNDATION: $2k → 9%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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$739k · 11 repeat orgs$30k to everyone else

11 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
6

Total granted

$739k
$16k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+13%
+28%

Still filing today

27%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $14k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthEmploymentAnimalsEducationOther
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

  • WC
    Weber County School District Foundation
    2× · 2023–2024 · $8k · revenue +255%
  • CO
    CROSSROADS OF THE WEST COUNCIL INC BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA 590
    2× · 2023–2024 · $5k · revenue +7%
  • EI
    ENABLEUTAH INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $3k · revenue +13%

Funded once

  • CA
    CURE ALZHEIMERS
    one grant, 2018 · $4k
  • UD
    UT DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
    one grant, 2018 · $4k
  • CC
    CROHN'S & COLITIS FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2018 · $4k · revenue +15%
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
Utah Geological Foundation
—
2
Economic Development Corporation of Utah Foundation

To serve as a catalyst for quality job growth and increased capital investment in the state.

Community Improvement
3
Autism Foundation of Utah
Health
4
Utah Public Lands Alliance
Education
5
Northern Utah Cancer Foundation
—
6
Center for Growth and Opportunity

The center for growth and opportunity at utah state university explores the scentific foundations of the interaction between individuals, business, and government to improve well-being for individuals and society. our focus is on producing…

International
7
University of Utah Foundation

Provide support to the University of Utah Growth Capital Partners Foundation in Charitable, Educational and Scientific purposes.

Philanthropy
8
Weber Pathways

The mission of trails foundation of northern utah is to plan, promote, construct, maintain, and protect a network of public pathways, trails, and related open spaces for non-motorized users throughout northern utah.

Civil Rights
9
Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah

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.

Environment
10
Ogden Family Foundation
Education
11
Canyons School District Education Foundation

Canyons School District Education Foundation works in tandem with community and business partners to build support for public schools and to advance Canyons School Districts mission to help every student become college- and career-ready…

Education
12
The Community Foundation of Utah

We are utah's partner in philanthropy, pioneering innovation and collaboration to invest in our community today for a brighter tomorrow.

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Youth Futures; the most unlike its peers is Weber County School District Foundation. 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

7 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. 7 of the 21 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
6/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY: $329,792 · OtherWEBER STATE UNIVERSITYAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $183,221 · OtherAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETYBOYS & GIRLS CLUB: $64,511 · OtherBOYS & GIRLS CLUBWOUNDED WARRIORS: $63,638 · OtherWOUNDED WARRIORSIndividual grant recipient: $39,463 · OtherYOUTH IMPACT INCORPORATED: $31,238 · Other+9 more: $37,369 · OtherWeber County School District Foundation: $8,490 · EducationCROHN'S & COLITIS FOUNDATION INC: $4,000 · HealthYOUTH FUTURES: $1,400 · HealthMidtown Community Health Center Inc: $1,400 · HealthENABLEUTAH INC: $3,444 · EmploymentGREATER OGDEN COMMUNITY NATURE CTR: $810 · Animals
Other$749,232Education$8,490Health$6,800Employment$3,444Animals$810

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWeber County School District Foundation: $8,490 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetCROSSROADS OF THE WEST COUNCIL INC BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA 590: $5,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCROHN'S & COLITIS FOUNDATION INC: $4,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetENABLEUTAH INC: $3,444 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetYOUTH FUTURES: $1,400 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMidtown Community Health Center Inc: $1,400 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGREATER OGDEN COMMUNITY NATURE CTR: $810 over 1y, 0.0% 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 Weber County School District Foundation ↗
  • Who funds CROSSROADS OF THE WEST COUNCIL INC BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA 590 ↗
  • Who funds CROHN'S & COLITIS FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds ENABLEUTAH INC ↗
  • Who funds YOUTH FUTURES ↗
  • Who funds Midtown Community Health Center Inc ↗
  • Who funds GREATER OGDEN COMMUNITY NATURE CTR ↗

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.

The Alan and Jeanne Hall FoundationUT17.9× affinity6 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Alan and Jeanne Hall Foundation · Dr Wc Swanson Family Foundation · Beaver Creek Foundation · Sally Langdon Barefoot Foundation · Wadman Foundation · Nebeker Family Foundation · United Way of Northern Utah · Pacificorp Foundation Aka Pacific Power Foundation Aka Rocky Mountain Power Foundati · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · 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 Phil Smith Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Phil Smith Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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 · 0–75%
    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 21 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 Phil Smith Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph