· Private foundation
The James B Loveland Memorial Foundation
Read this first · the figures below need context
98% of The James B Loveland Memorial Foundation’s FY2023 grant dollars went to The Pi Foundation Inc, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2023 names 1 organization directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2019, the last year The James B Loveland Memorial Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 5 organizations, $56k. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2023.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2019
- Under $10k2 grants · $6k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $50k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UTAH VALLEY UNIVERSITY MEN'S GOLF | $20,000 |
| UTAH METROPOLITAN BALLET | $10,000 |
| DISTINGUISHED YOUNG WOMEN FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - HAWAII | $10,000 |
| PEOPLE HELPING PEOPLE | $5,000 |
| BUNDLED BLESSINGS FERTILITY FOUNDATION | $750 |
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 (FY17–20, $23k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 78% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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.
7 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2019, 3 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call). Read against FY2019, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
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 FY2023, 33% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
- KOKids on the Move Inc3× · 2018–2023 · $60k · revenue +86%
- DYDISTINGUISHED YOUNG WOMEN FOUNDATION2× · 2018–2019 · $20k · revenue +1%
- PHPEOPLE HELPING PEOPLE3× · 2017–2019 · $18k · revenue +34%
Funded once
- MCMountainlands Community Health Centergraduatedone grant, 2017 · $20k · revenue +88%
- AJAMERICA'S JUNIOR MISS PAGEANT INCone grant, 2017 · $15k
- UWUNITED WAY OF UTAH COUNTYone grant, 2018 · $10k
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.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Pi Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Onset Gives. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
12 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. 12 of the 24 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 THE PI FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Kids on the Move Inc ↗
- Who funds OPERATION PAY IT FORWARD ↗
- Who funds DISTINGUISHED YOUNG WOMEN FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Mountainlands Community Health Center ↗
- Who funds PEOPLE HELPING PEOPLE ↗
- Who funds Utah Metropolitan Ballet ↗
- Who funds ONSET GIVES ↗
- Who funds CONDITION ONE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds FREEDOM HUNTERS ↗
- Who funds FIVE 12 FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Bundled Blessings Fertility Foundation ↗
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: The Ashton Family Foundation · George S and Dolores Dore Eccles Foundation · Sorenson Legacy Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation 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 The James B Loveland Memorial 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.
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.