· Private foundation
The Jacquelyn & Gregory Zehner 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2021–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k11 grants · $44k
- $10k–50k23 grants · $400k
- $50k–250k6 grants · $340k
- $250k+1 grant · $250k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| FIDELITY CHARITABLE | $250,000 |
| THE HARBOR FUND | $90,000 |
| PEOPLES HEALTH CLINIC | $50,000 |
| PEACE HOUSE INC | $50,000 |
| UTAH FILM CENTER | $50,000 |
| CHRISTIAN CENTER OF PARK CITY | $50,000 |
| YALE UNIVERSITY | $50,000 |
| THE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC | $35,000 |
| YWCA | $25,000 |
| VOICES FOR UTAH CHILDREN | $25,000 |
| WOMEN OF THE WORLD | $25,000 |
| SCHWAB CHARITABLE | $25,000 |
| THE CENTER FOR ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY | $25,000 |
| CULTURE REFRAMED | $25,000 |
| EQUALITY UTAH FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
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 (FY21–24, $99k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 39% 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 +13% since the first grant, against -1% for the ones you funded once.
38 repeat relationships — 26 still active in FY2024, 12 since wound down; 14 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 48% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $526k 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
Sundance Institute4× · 2021–2024 · $633k · revenue +24%- PCPark City Education Foundation4× · 2021–2024 · $95k · revenue +13%
- PHPeople's Health Clicnic3× · 2021–2024 · $75k · revenue +7%
Funded once
- TUThe University of British Columbiaone grant, 2023 · $385k · revenue +8%
- TPTHE POLICY PROJECTone grant, 2023 · $150k · revenue -7%
BARNARD COLLEGEone grant, 2022 · $35k · revenue -3%
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.
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 promise (up) is committed to 100% of kids and families thriving. we unify leaders, partners, communities and systems to achieve that promise.
World trade center utah accelerates growth for utah companies through our global networks, programs, and services.
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…
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.
Democracy Means Equality, Freedom & Justice: It means having a representative government. UDC is here to transform Utah politics and ensure that every voice counts.
Utah Leads set out to understand what makes our information ecosystem in Utah unique, who is influencing policy formation in Utah, how that influence works in practice through multiple channels and across channels, and what policy…
Stimulate local business establishment, growth, and development by facilitating business to business and business to community relationships throughout Utah County.
Utah clean energy's mission is to lead the clean energy transformation with vision and expertise. our vision for the future is healthy, thriving communities for all, empowered and sustained by clean energy.
The organization's mission is to preserve and promote individual civil rights and civil liberties as guaranteed by the united states and utah constitutions and the civil rights laws within the state of utah.
To advance sustainable health care solutions for underserved utahns through better access, education, and public policy.
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.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Equality Utah Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Immigrant Legal Services. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 17 years old; the field is 11. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 29% startups (under 5 years old) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 13% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 15% 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.
57 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. 57 of the 86 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 Sundance Institute ↗
- Who funds CHRISTIAN CENTER OF PARK CITY ↗
- Who funds The University of British Columbia ↗
- Who funds THE POLICY PROJECT ↗
- Who funds CULTURE REFRAMED INC ↗
- Who funds Park City Education Foundation ↗
- Who funds Harbor Fund ↗
- Who funds People's Health Clicnic ↗
- Who funds IMPACTASSETSINC ↗
- Who funds Peace House Inc ↗
- Who funds Economic Development Corp of Utah ↗
- Who funds UTAH FILM CENTER ↗
- Who funds EQUALITY UTAH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Utah Children ↗
- Who funds HUNTSMAN CANCER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Women of the World ↗
- Who funds Women's Leadership Institute of Utah ↗
- Who funds ON BEING PROJECT ↗
- Who funds The Other Side Academy ↗
- Who funds BARNARD COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds THE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds Utah Museum of Contemporary Art ↗
- Who funds PARK CITY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds Young Women's Christian Association of Utah ↗
- Who funds Clean Slate Utah ↗
- Who funds WOMEN MOVING MILLIONS INC ↗
- Who funds SAFFRON KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds DONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC ↗
- Who funds Latin American Leadership Foundation Inc ↗
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: Larry H Miller and Gail Miller Family Foundation · George S and Dolores Dore Eccles Foundation · Sorenson Legacy Foundation · The Community Foundation of Utah · Ssir Cares Inc · Park City Community Foundation · Lawrence & Janet Dee Foundation · Dominion Energy Charitable Foundation · Promontory Foundation · Ballard Miller Foundation · PROG Holdings Foundation Inc · Kanter Family 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 The Jacquelyn & Gregory Zehner Foundation 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.
- Center for Human Development Inc — 26% of income from government
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.