Skip to content
The Craig and Janine Call Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Craig and Janine Call 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.

$4k
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$521
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

Religion$95kHuman Services$11kHousing & Shelter$5kFood & Nutrition$5kCrime & Legal$3kHealth$3kInternational$2kEnvironment$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$500
Median grant
1
States reached
$56k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SALVATION ARMY$521
Individual grant recipient$515
OGDEN RESCUE MISSION$515
UTAH FOOD BANK$500
CATHOLIC COMMUNITY CHARITIES$500
LANTERN HOUSEST ANNES CENTER$500
ODGEN FRIENDS OF ACOUSTICAL MUSIC$300
OGDEN VALLEY LAND TRUST$258
HUMANE SOCIETY OF UTAH$214
PRIMARY CHILDRENS HOSPITAL$200
Individual grant recipient$126
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 (FY18–25, $6k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%UNTIL WE ARE ALL FREE: $1k → 11%OGDEN RESCUE MISSION: $1k → 9%OGDEN RESCUE MISSION: $515 → 9%OGDEN RESCUE MISSION: $500 → 9%OGDEN RESCUE MISSION: $500 → 9%OGDEN RESCUE MISSION: $500 → 9%OGDEN RESCUE MISSION: $200 → 9%THE ROAD HOME: $500 → 8%THE ROAD HOME: $500 → 8%THE ROAD HOME: $500 → 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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$120k · 13 repeat orgs$11k to everyone else

13 repeat relationships: 10 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
13

Total granted

$120k
$10k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+48%
+55%

Still filing today

38%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $300 went to new ones.

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

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

’18’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesEnvironmentAnimalsHealthInternationalArts & 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

  • UF
    UTAH FOOD BANK
    7× · 2018–2025 · $5k · revenue +95%
  • RM
    RESCUE MISSION OF SALT LAKE INC
    6× · 2018–2025 · $3k · revenue +9%
  • TR
    THE ROAD HOME
    3× · 2020–2022 · $2k · revenue +48%

Funded once

  • CO
    CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER DAY SAI
    one grant, 2024 · $4k
  • TS
    THE SHAMBA FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $2k · revenue -70%
  • UW
    UNTIL WE ARE ALL FREE MOVEMENT
    one grant, 2024 · $1k · revenue -14%
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 Public Lands Alliance
Education
2
Utah Geological Foundation
—
3
Save Our Great Salt Lake
Environment
4
Trails Utah

Trails Utah is dedicated to trails advocacy, planning, funding, and construction in needed areas throughout the state.

Environment
5
Utah Agricultural Land Trust

Conserves private agricultural lands in Utah to protect working farms ranches wildlife habitat open space and scenic and historic resources while assisting landowners in achieving long-term conservation goals.

Food & Nutrition
6
Solutions Utah a Non-Profit Corporation

Solutions Utah was created to address homelessness and its impacts on our community. We work on solving Utahs challenges together. What used to be a great place to live, work, and visit is becoming less safe and more difficult to live and…

Community Improvement
7
Real Salt Lake Foundation
Human Services
8
Utah Zoological Society

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.

Animals
9
Scenic Utah

Scenic Utah is working to protect and enhance the scenic qualities of our communities, countryside, and roadways. We partner with diverse groups who share the common goal of safeguarding the remarkable visual character of the Beehive…

Environment
10
Ogden Family Foundation
Education
11
Utah Shakespeare Festival Foundation
Arts & Culture
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 Utah Open Lands Conservation Association Inc; the most unlike its peers is Cure Childhood Cancer Inc. 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

11 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. 11 of the 27 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
7/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS: $91,181 · OtherTHE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTSSALVATION ARMY: $5,221 · OtherUTAH FOOD BANK: $5,200 · Other+14 more: $17,213 · Other+14 moreRESCUE MISSION OF SALT LAKE INC: $3,215 · Human ServicesTHE ROAD HOME: $1,500 · Human ServicesUNTIL WE ARE ALL FREE MOVEMENT: $1,000 · Human ServicesTHE SHAMBA FOUNDATION: $2,000 · InternationalOGDEN VALLEY LAND TRUST INC: $1,266 · EnvironmentThe Ocean Foundation: $250 · EnvironmentUTAH OPEN LANDS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC: $200 · EnvironmentHUMANE SOCIETY OF UTAH: $1,264 · AnimalsCure Childhood Cancer Inc: $500 · HealthOgden Friends of Acoustic Music-OFOAM: $300 · Arts & Culture
Other$118,815Human Services$5,715International$2,000Environment$1,716Animals$1,264Health$500Arts & Culture$300

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUTAH FOOD BANK: $5,200 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetRESCUE MISSION OF SALT LAKE INC: $3,215 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SHAMBA FOUNDATION: $2,000 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetTHE ROAD HOME: $1,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetOGDEN VALLEY LAND TRUST INC: $1,266 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF UTAH: $1,264 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetUNTIL WE ARE ALL FREE MOVEMENT: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCure Childhood Cancer Inc: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOgden Friends of Acoustic Music-OFOAM: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Ocean Foundation: $250 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 UTAH FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds RESCUE MISSION OF SALT LAKE INC ↗
  • Who funds THE SHAMBA FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE ROAD HOME ↗
  • Who funds OGDEN VALLEY LAND TRUST INC ↗
  • Who funds HUMANE SOCIETY OF UTAH ↗
  • Who funds UNTIL WE ARE ALL FREE MOVEMENT ↗
  • Who funds Cure Childhood Cancer Inc ↗
  • Who funds Ogden Friends of Acoustic Music-OFOAM ↗
  • Who funds The Ocean Foundation ↗
  • Who funds UTAH OPEN LANDS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC ↗

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile Foundation
Amazonsmile FoundationWA2.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 The Craig and Janine Call Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Craig and Janine Call 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%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Craig and Janine Call Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Craig and Janine Call 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.

    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 27 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 Craig and Janine Call’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