Skip to content
The Danna Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

The Danna Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$149k
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$85k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0192% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Housing & Shelter$744kReligion$296kCommunity Improvement$289kHuman Services$105kHealth$88kEducation$55kYouth Development$55kPhilanthropy$50kOther$0
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k5 grants · $23k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $41k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $85k
$7,500
Median grant
3
States reached
$3.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LUCKY DUCK FOUNDATION$85,000
PROJECT ACCESS$26,200
ALPHA PROJECT$15,000
VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA$7,500
NEIGHBORWORKS$5,000
UTAH VETERANS ALLIANCE$5,000
Individual grant recipient$3,850
THE BURN INSTITUTE$1,500
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 66% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%SCHOLARSHIP AMERICA: $20k → 11%PROJECT ACCESS: $85k → 10%NEIGHBORWORKS: $10k → 10%LUCKY DUCK FOUNDATION: $145k → 11%RUIDOSO MUNICIPAL SCHOOLS: $10k → 17%ILG RELIEF FUND INC: $10k → 13%BRENT & CHERI ANDRUS CHARITABLE TRU: $25k → 5%BRIDLE UP HOPE: $30k → 8%PROJECT ACCESS: $65k → 10%LUCKY DUCK FOUNDATION: $85k → 11%BRIDLE UP HOPE: $25k → 8%PROJECT ACCESS: $45k → 10%LUCKY DUCK FOUNDATION: $55k → 11%PROJECT ACCESS: $30k → 10%LUCKY DUCK FOUNDATION: $50k → 11%PROJECT ACCESS: $26k → 10%THE BURNS INSTITUTE: $20k → 11%PROJECT ACCESS: $15k → 10%LUCKY DUCK FOUNDATION: $15k → 11%SALT LAKE INTERFAITH ROUNDTABLE: $150k → 8%PROJECT ACCESS: $12k → 10%THE BURNS INSTITUTE: $12k → 11%SALT LAKE INTERFAITH ROUNDTABLE: $145k → 8%PROJECT ACCESS: $11k → 10%THE BURNS INSTITUTE: $10k → 11%HUNGRY FOR LIFE: $25k → 8%THE BURN INSTITUTE: $10k → 11%COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF UTAH: $25k → 8%THE BURNS INSTITUTE: $10k → 11%TIFIE HUMANITARIAN: $10k → 8%MALIHEH CLINIC: $10k → 8%YIGBY: $70k → 11%VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA: $10k → 8%ALPHA PROJECT: $64k → 11%ALPHA PROJECT: $50k → 11%NEIGHBORWORKS: $30k → 8%ALPHA PROJECT: $50k → 11%NEIGHBORWORKS: $30k → 8%WHEELS OF CHANGE: $25k → 11%NEIGHBORWORKS: $18k → 8%ALPHA PROJECT: $15k → 11%COMINIDADES UNIDAS: $10k → 8%ALPHA PROJECT: $15k → 11%NEIGHBORWORKS: $10k → 8%ALPHA PROJECT: $10k → 11%PHENOMENAL FAMILIES: $20k → 11%INTERFAITH COMMUNITIES: $25k → 11%MONARCH SCHOOL: $25k → 11%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.

83%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.5M · 12 repeat orgs$301k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +37% since the first grant, against -15% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
19

Total granted

$1.5M
$293k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+37%
-15%

Still filing today

75%
42%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthPhilanthropyEducationCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitInternationalOther
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

  • LD
    LUCKY DUCK FOUNDATION
    5× · 2020–2024 · $350k · revenue +37%
  • PA
    Project Access Inc
    8× · 2017–2024 · $289k · revenue +186%
  • AP
    ALPHA PROJECT FOR THE HOMELESS
    6× · 2019–2024 · $204k · revenue +112%

Funded once

  • Y
    YIGBY
    one grant, 2021 · $70k
  • WO
    WHEELS OF CHANGE
    one grant, 2019 · $25k
  • HF
    HUNGRY FOR LIFE
    one grant, 2017 · $25k
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
House of Hope

Treating substance use disorders, rebuilding lives, strengthening families, and empowering women.

—
2
Family Promise - Salt Lake

We help families experiencing homelessness find lasting independence and security.

Housing & Shelter
3
Real Salt Lake Foundation
Human Services
4
Regional Task Force On the Homeless

RTFH exists to reduce and end homelessness in San Diego, ensuring that if this situation does happen for anyone, it remains a rare, brief and non-recurring instance; not an outcome.

Human Services
5
Utah Geological Foundation
—
6
California Veterans Assistance

To provide programs to assist homeless veterans and veterans at risk of becoming homeless with personal skills, training and employment.

Human Services
7
Teva Cares Foundation
Health
8
Interval House

The mission of the organization is to ensure safety and stability for people who are battered, abused, homeless or at risk; to create public awareness about the epidemic of violence; and to mobilize the community to prevent violence and…

Human Services
9
Insight Housing Fka Berkeley Food and Housing Project

IH's programs are grounded in the core components of food, emergency shelter, transitional housing, permanent housing, and rapid re-housing/ homelessness prevention services. Core programming is enriched with wraparound supportive…

Human Services
10
Trauma-Informed Utah

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…

Health
11
Border Angels

We advocate for human rights humane immigration reform and social justice. Our efforts aim to reduce fatalities along the US-Mexico border by educating and assisting communities on both sides. Our services include educational programs…

Human Services
12
Northern Utah Cancer Foundation
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Community Foundation of Utah; the most unlike its peers is Brent & Cheri Andrus Charitable Trust. 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

18 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. 18 of the 33 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)
18/18
Grantees still filing
8/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SALT LAKE INTERFAITH ROUNDTABLE: $295,000 · OtherSALT LAKE INTERFAITH ROUNDTABLEALPHA PROJECT FOR THE HOMELESS: $203,827 · OtherALPHA PROJECT FOR THE HOMELESSNEIGHBORWORKS: $107,500 · OtherNEIGHBORWORKSYIGBY: $70,000 · OtherYIGBYInterfaith Community Services Inc: $35,000 · Other+18 more: $182,764 · Other+18 moreLUCKY DUCK FOUNDATION: $350,000 · HealthLUCKY DUCK FOUNDATIONThe Rachel Covey Foundation: $55,000 · HealthThe Rachel Covey Foundatio…BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $20,000 · HealthProject Access Inc: $288,700 · Community ImprovementProject Access IncBurn Institute: $68,000 · PhilanthropyThe Community Foundation of Utah: $25,000 · PhilanthropyBRENT & CHERI ANDRUS CHARITABLE TRUST: $25,000 · PhilanthropyUTAH VETERANS ALLIANCE: $25,000 · Public BenefitMONARCH SCHOOL PROJECT: $25,000 · EducationTifie Humanitarian: $10,000 · International
Other$894,091Health$425,000Community Improvement$288,700Philanthropy$118,000Public Benefit$25,000Education$25,000International$10,000

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 budgetLUCKY DUCK FOUNDATION: $350,000 over 5y, 3.8% of budgetProject Access Inc: $288,700 over 8y, 0.7% of budgetALPHA PROJECT FOR THE HOMELESS: $203,827 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetBurn Institute: $68,000 over 8y, 1.3% of budgetThe Rachel Covey Foundation: $55,000 over 2y, 3.0% of budgetInterfaith Community Services Inc: $35,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetUTAH VETERANS ALLIANCE: $25,000 over 5y, 5.9% of budgetThe Community Foundation of Utah: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBRENT & CHERI ANDRUS CHARITABLE TRUST: $25,000 over 1y, 4.7% of budgetMONARCH SCHOOL PROJECT: $25,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA UTAH: $12,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTifie Humanitarian: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetMVW RELIEF FUND INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetUTAH FOOD BANK: $6,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCALIFORNIA FIRE FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSylvia Earle AllianceMission Blue: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSPECTRUM MINISTRIES: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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 LUCKY DUCK FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Project Access Inc ↗
  • Who funds ALPHA PROJECT FOR THE HOMELESS ↗
  • Who funds Burn Institute ↗
  • Who funds The Rachel Covey Foundation ↗
  • Who funds Interfaith Community Services Inc ↗
  • Who funds UTAH VETERANS ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds The Community Foundation of Utah ↗
  • Who funds BRENT & CHERI ANDRUS CHARITABLE TRUST ↗
  • Who funds MONARCH SCHOOL PROJECT ↗
  • Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
  • Who funds VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA UTAH ↗
  • Who funds Tifie Humanitarian ↗
  • Who funds MVW RELIEF FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds UTAH FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds CALIFORNIA FIRE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Sylvia Earle AllianceMission Blue ↗
  • Who funds SPECTRUM MINISTRIES ↗

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.

Sempra FoundationAmerican Endowment Fo…National Philanthropi…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Sempra FoundationCA14.1× affinity5 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sempra Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · 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 The Danna Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Danna Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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 · 0–25%
    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 Danna Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Danna 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 33 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 Danna’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