· Private foundation
Robert E Schocker Charitable Trust
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| RED BUTTE GARDEN | $5,904 |
| ROAM HUMANITARIAN | $5,745 |
| DAVIS SCHOOL DISTRICT | $4,155 |
| GIVING HOPE CHARITY | $3,900 |
| WEBER STATE FUNDRAISER | $3,900 |
| SAVE OUR CANYONS | $2,500 |
| UTAH FOOD BANK | $2,100 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,000 |
| WOODS CROSS TEEN CENTER | $2,000 |
| MAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION | $2,000 |
| BRIGHTON FOOTBALL FUNDRAISER | $1,800 |
| UTAH STATE FUNDRAISER | $1,665 |
| HALE CENTER THEATER | $1,550 |
| LOVE4MIA | $1,500 |
| ALZHEIMERS ASSOCIATION | $1,050 |
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 (FY22–25, $3k) 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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 +21% since the first grant, against +17% for the ones you funded once.
23 repeat relationships — 20 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 12 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $17k 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
- ADALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC3× · 2023–2025 · $7k · revenue +11%
- CCCITIZENS COMMITTEE TO SAVE OUR3× · 2023–2025 · $5k · revenue +42%
- UFUTAH FOOD BANK3× · 2022–2025 · $4k · revenue +5%
Funded once
- UOUNIVERSITY OF UTAHone grant, 2020 · $18k
- PGPLEASANT GROVEALPINE SCHOOL DISTRICone grant, 2024 · $6k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2023 · $3k
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.
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 foundation's mission is to produce objective, thorough and well- reasoned research and analysis that promotes the effective use of public resources, a thriving economy, a well-prepared workforce and a high quality of life for utahns.…
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.
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…
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.
To effectively and efficiently mitigate risks to the reliability and security of the western interconnection's bulk power system.
We are utah's partner in philanthropy, pioneering innovation and collaboration to invest in our community today for a brighter tomorrow.
United way of salt lake (uwsl) mobilizes people and resources to support basic needs and education.
World trade center utah accelerates growth for utah companies through our global networks, programs, and services.
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Make-a-Wish Foundation of Utah Inc and the most unlike its peers is Trails Utah. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 40 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 16% 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.
25 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. 25 of the 66 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 ROAM HUMANITARIAN ↗
- Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds CITIZENS COMMITTEE TO SAVE OUR ↗
- Who funds UTAH FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds HUMANE SOCIETY OF UTAH ↗
- Who funds MAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF UTAH INC ↗
- Who funds Crossroads Urban Center ↗
- Who funds Davis Education Foundation ↗
- Who funds THE ONE LOVE FOUNDATION IN HONOR OF YEARDLEY LOVE INC ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds FULLER CENTER FOR HOUSING OF CACHE VALLEY INC ↗
- Who funds Ronald McDonald House Charities of the Intermountain Area Inc ↗
- Who funds Trails Utah ↗
- Who funds WORLD BICYCLE RELIEF NFP ↗
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 · Sorenson Legacy Foundation · The Community Foundation of Utah · The Huntsman Foundation · Willard L Eccles Charitable Foundation · University Impact · American Endowment Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Robert E Schocker Charitable Trust 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.