How much did The Zack and Cambry Nelson Foundation grant in FY2022?

International$61kHuman Services$53kEnvironment$40kHealth$35kPublic Safety & Disaster$20kCivil Rights$15kPhilanthropy$10kEducation$10kYouth Development$10kOther$137k

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2020

food bank

2021

fertilityinternational

2022

—

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2022 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2022

Under $10k3 grants · $15k
$10k–50k1 grant · $10k

$5,000

Median grant

States reached

$200k

Total assets

Largest grants

GIVIO CHARITABLE FOUNDATION$10,000
WEECYCLE$5,000
INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE INC$5,000
SAVE THE CHILDREN FEDERATION INC$5,000

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY20–22, $43k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11% — the area typically sits at 10%. 51% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 6% of The Zack and Cambry Nelson Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 23% of the giving stays in UT; read by stated purpose it is 17% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

The Zack and Cambry Nelson Foundationlessmore of its giving

Placed by recipient address

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your field

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.

Global Forest Generation

Global Forest Generation restores and protects forest ecosystems in partnership with grassroots leaders and local communities across vast landscapes which play a critical role in preserving water, protecting biodiversity, storing carbon,…

Environment

Global Impact Investing Network Inc

Increase the scale and effectiveness of impact investing to solve systemic problems facing people and the planet.

Philanthropy

Global Fund for Children

To advance the rights and opportunities of children and youth worldwide.

Arts & Culture

Rainforest Foundation Inc

The rainforest foundation us provides financial and technical support to indigenous communities and organizations to secure their rights to their traditional lands and protect their forests and livelihoods. we are tackling the world's most…

Environment

Climate Foundation

To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.

Science & Tech

Global Greengrants Fund

Mobilize resources for communities worldwide to protect our shared planet.

Environment

VisionFund International

VisionFund International (VFI) was established for the purpose of supporting World Vision International (WVI) by coordinating and providing funding to WV-affiliated microfinance institutions located in developing countries.

Philanthropy

Jewish Fertility Foundation Inc

The jewish fertility foundation (jff) engages hopeful parents by providing financial assistance, emotional support, and infertility education to those struggling to build their families.

Health

Rise Against Hunger Inc

Rise against hunger is growing a global movement to end hunger by empowering communities, nourishing lives and responding to emergencies.

International

Food Forward Inc

Food forward(r) is one of the nation's largest independent urban produce recovery organizations.

Food & Nutrition

Helping Children Worldwide Inc

Helping Children Worldwide is strengthening and empowering families and communities in the Global South to address the root causes of child poverty and child mortality.

Youth Development

The Fistula Foundation

Fistula Foundation works to end the suffering caused by the childbirth injury obstetric fistula by getting as many women treated as possible. Additionally, the Foundation is focused on increasing the number of trained obstetric fistula…

Health

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Network for Good and the most unlike its peers is World Vision Inc. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 31 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/31

the rest of the field

11%

206,164/1,819,534

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.

06the grantee network

31 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

31/31

Grantees still filing

25/31

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$167,160International$61,000Human Services$53,000Environment$40,000Health$35,000Public Safety & Disaster$20,000Civil Rights$15,000

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.

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.

doTERRA Healing Hands FoundationUT13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: doTERRA Healing Hands Foundation · The Community Foundation of Utah · Sorenson Legacy Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 organisation The Zack and Cambry Nelson 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.

2025

’20’21’22’23’24’25

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

1get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%

typical government reliance, FY20–25

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. 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.

04Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: HIGHLAND CITY FOUNDATION.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

high risk

~0 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 8 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

8 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 458.9× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 461513545 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on HIGHLAND CITY FOUNDATION, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

FlagFinancial stability— Roughly 0 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 74% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to The Zack and Cambry Nelson Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Zack and Cambry Nelson Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

The Zack and Cambry Nelson Foundation

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

31 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The Zack and Cambry Nelson Foundation?

More from the funding graph

The Zack and Cambry Nelson Foundation

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

31 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The Zack and Cambry Nelson Foundation?

More from the funding graph