Skip to content
Raddon Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Raddon Family Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$75k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$43k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Religion$215kEducation$88kPublic Safety & Disaster$79kFood & Nutrition$53kHuman Services$17kInternational$15kArts & Culture$3kHealth$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $7k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $68k
$5,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$435k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS$42,956
BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY$25,000
ABUNDANT GRACE COASTSIDE WORKER$5,000
UTAH FOOD BANK$1,500
HUMANITARIAN EXPERIENCE FOR YOUTH$500
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 (FY17–25, $62k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%ABUNDANT GRACE COASTSIDE WORKER: $5k → 7%ABUNDANT GRACE COASTSIDE WORKER: $5k → 7%A CHILD'S HOPE FOUNDATION: $500 → 8%ABUNDANT GRACE COASTSIDE WORKER: $4k → 7%ABUNDANT GRACE COASTSIDE WORKER: $2k → 7%RISE & REBUILD FOUNDATION: $10k → 8%RISE & REBUILD FOUNDATION: $10k → 8%RISE & REBUILD FOUNDATION: $10k → 8%RISE & REBUILD FOUNDATION: $10k → 8%RISE AND REBUILD FOUNDATION: $5k → 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.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$424k · 11 repeat orgs$53k to everyone else

11 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
13

Total granted

$424k
$27k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+15%
+36%

Still filing today

64%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 66% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $26k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHealthInternationalReligionEducationArts & 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

  • RA
    Rise and Rebuild Foundation
    5× · 2017–2022 · $45k · revenue +15%
  • AG
    Abundant Grace Coastside Worker Inc
    4× · 2022–2025 · $16k · revenue +20%
  • UF
    UTAH FOOD BANK
    9× · 2017–2025 · $8k · revenue +93%

Funded once

  • LS
    LIGHTHOUSE SANCTUARYgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue +36%
  • GF
    GSTC FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2019 · $5k · revenue -46%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $3k
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
Child Liberation Foundation Inc

The Child Liberation Foundation (CLF), founded in February 2017, is dedicated to eradicating child trafficking worldwide. In 2023, CLF expanded its mission beyond rescue operations to emphasize rehabilitation and healing for survivors of…

Human Services
2
Annapurna Global Foundation
Philanthropy
3
Global United Foundation
International
4
Cg Foundation
Philanthropy
5
Lgt Foundation
—
6
Gitel Foundation
Human Services
7
Rt Foundation
—
8
Himalayan Childrens Fund

The Himalayan Children's Fund is a way for people around the world, and the west in particular, to connect with the lives of people in the Himalayan Region of Nepal, India and Tibet. HCF provides support for Thrangu Rinpoche's many…

International
9
Bountiful Children's Foundation

Bringing life-altering nutritional supplements to children throughout the world.

—
10
Utah Geological Foundation
—
11
Ch Foundation
—
12
The Change the World Foundation Trust
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is A Child's Hope Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Gstc 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

13 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. 13 of the 26 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/13
Grantees still filing
7/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS: $175,261 · OtherTHE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTSLDS CHURCH: $76,000 · OtherLDS CHURCHIndividual grant recipient: $50,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientBRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY: $25,000 · OtherBRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY+11 more: $26,735 · Other+11 moreRise and Rebuild Foundation: $45,000 · Human ServicesRise and Rebui…Abundant Grace Coastside Worker Inc: $16,000 · Human ServicesAbundant Grace…+2 more: $1,400 · Human ServicesTHE JOHN A & LEAH D WIDTSOE FOUNDATION FKA THE JOHN A WIDTSOE FOUNDATION: $40,000 · ReligionTHE JOHN …LIGHTHOUSE SANCTUARY: $10,000 · InternationalCENTER FOR HUMANITARIAN OUTREACH AND INTERCULTURAL EXCHANGE: $700 · InternationalHAITIAN ROOTS: $6,000 · EducationOUR RESCUE: $3,200 · Arts & CultureBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $1,000 · HealthAUTISM COUNCIL OF UTAH: $600 · Health
Other$352,996Human Services$62,400Religion$40,000International$10,700Education$6,000Arts & Culture$3,200Health$1,600

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 budgetRise and Rebuild Foundation: $45,000 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetTHE JOHN A & LEAH D WIDTSOE FOUNDATION FKA THE JOHN A WIDTSOE FOUNDATION: $40,000 over 4y, 40% of budgetAbundant Grace Coastside Worker Inc: $16,000 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetLIGHTHOUSE SANCTUARY: $10,000 over 1y, 9.5% of budgetUTAH FOOD BANK: $8,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetGSTC FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetOUR RESCUE: $3,200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHILDREN OF ETHIOPIA EDUCATION FUND: $900 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetCENTER FOR HUMANITARIAN OUTREACH AND INTERCULTURAL EXCHANGE: $700 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAUTISM COUNCIL OF UTAH: $600 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetA CHILD'S HOPE FOUNDATION: $500 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 Rise and Rebuild Foundation ↗
  • Who funds THE JOHN A & LEAH D WIDTSOE FOUNDATION FKA THE JOHN A WIDTSOE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Abundant Grace Coastside Worker Inc ↗
  • Who funds LIGHTHOUSE SANCTUARY ↗
  • Who funds UTAH FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds HAITIAN ROOTS ↗
  • Who funds GSTC FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds OUR RESCUE ↗
  • Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
  • Who funds CHILDREN OF ETHIOPIA EDUCATION FUND ↗
  • Who funds CENTER FOR HUMANITARIAN OUTREACH AND INTERCULTURAL EXCHANGE ↗
  • Who funds AUTISM COUNCIL OF UTAH ↗
  • Who funds A CHILD'S HOPE FOUNDATION ↗

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.

doTERRA Healing Hands…Paypal Charitable Giv…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
doTERRA Healing Hands FoundationUT13.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: doTERRA Healing Hands Foundation · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Raddon Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Raddon Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%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
    0get no government money at all
    2report 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 26 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 Raddon Family’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