Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersAlso receives grants — funding profile →
Plinth

· Public charity

United Way of Central and Southern Utah

We improve lives by mobilizing the caring power of our local community to provide resources and programs that focus on health, education, and income.

$1.6M
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.

Human Services$1.1MHealth$341kHousing & Shelter$173kYouth Development$131kPublic Safety & Disaster$32kEducation$24kCrime & Legal$24k
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 1 grants below total $5,200 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $1,611,080 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $1,605,880 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

$5,200
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Community Action Services$5,200
02The need
03

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 (FY17–25, $461k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 6%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 6%CANYON CREEK WOMEN'S CRISIS CENTER: $6k → 13%FAMILY SUPPORT CENTER OF SOUTHWESTE: $6k → 13%TURN COMMUNITY SERVICES: $6k → 13%FAMILY SUPPORT CENTER OF SOUTHWESTE: $6k → 13%FAMILY SUPPORT CENTER OF SOUTHWESTE: $6k → 13%CANYON CREEK WOMEN'S CRISIS CENTER: $6k → 13%TURN COMMUNITY SERVICES: $6k → 13%CANYON CREEK WOMEN'S CRISIS CENTER: $6k → 13%CANYON CREEK WOMEN'S CRISIS CENTER: $6k → 13%TURN COMMUNITY SERVICES: $6k → 13%CANYON CREEK WOMEN'S CRISIS CENTER: $6k → 13%TURN COMMUNITY SERVICES: $6k → 13%COMMUNITY ACTION SERVICES: $76k → 8%COMMUNITY ACTION SERVICES: $75k → 8%Community Action Services: $52k → 8%COMMUNITY ACTION SERVICES: $41k → 8%COMMUNITY ACTION SERVICES: $41k → 8%COMMUNITY ACTION SERVICES: $37k → 8%Centro Hispano: $34k → 8%CENTRO HISPANO: $11k → 8%COMMUNITY ACTION SERVICES: $10k → 8%CENTRO HISPANO: $5k → 8%Community Action Services: $5k → 8%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 linein 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 — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.8M · 22 repeat orgs$10k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +40% since the first grant, against +13% for the ones you funded once.

22 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2025, 21 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

22
1

Total granted

$1.8M
$10k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+40%
+13%

Still filing today

82%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthHuman ServicesHousing & ShelterEducationOther

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

  • UV
    Utah Valley Family Support Center Inc
    7× · 2017–2024 · $572k · revenue +40%
  • CA
    Community Action Services and Food Bank
    8× · 2017–2025 · $338k · revenue +47%
  • TC
    The Center for Women and Children in Crisis
    5× · 2019–2023 · $95k · revenue +243%

Funded once

  • DB
    DAVIS BEHAVIORAL HEALTH INC
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +13%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your 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.

1
Family Promise - Salt Lake

We help families experiencing homelessness find lasting independence and security.

Housing & Shelter
2
Wasatch Homeless Health Care

Help homeless Utahns improve their health and quality of life by providing high-quality health care and support services.

Health
3
Central Utah Enterprises

To provide services to disabled persons with a focus on assisting individuals in Utah County with cognitive disabilities gain skills to enable them to enter the workforce.

—
4
Kids Who Count

We empower families to optimize the developmental potential of their young children.

Education
5
Shelter Providers of Utah

To help people experiencing or at risk of homelessness build new lives through construction, community engagement, and education.

—
6
The Center for Economic Opportunity and Belonging

Our mission is to engage with communities and catalyze private, public, and philanthropic partnerships to remedy opportunity gaps in economic opportunity, education, health, and housing in Utah.

Community Improvement
7
Urban Indian Center of Salt Lake

To serve The People by honoring Native cultures, strengthening health and wellness programs, and cultivating community. We envision all Native peoples living balanced, prosperous, and healthy lives in diverse communities for Seven…

—
8
Ability 1st Utah

Assisting persons with disabilities to develop independent living and social skills, assisting with housing and transportation needs, rights advocacy, and counseling.

Human Services
9
Utah Regional Housing Corporation

Provide housing to low-income families in provo, utah.

Housing & Shelter
10
House of Hope

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

—
11
Midtown Community Health Center Inc

Provide medical, dental, and mental health care and pharmaceuticals to low-income families.

Health
12
Utah Housing Coalition Inc

The promotion of low-income housing within the state of utah.

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Center for Women and Children in Crisis and the most unlike its peers is Teens Act. 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

20 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. 20 of the 23 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/20
Grantees still filing
15/20
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Utah Valley Family Support Center Inc — $571,715 · OtherUtah Valley Family Support Center IncRecreation and Habilitation Services (RAH) — $176,588 · OtherRecreation and Habilitation Services (RAH)ALPINE HOUSE — $68,094 · OtherALPINE HOUSEKIDS CAUSE FOUNDATION — $66,891 · OtherKIDS CAUSE FOUNDATIONCommunity Health Connect — $42,806 · Other+4 more — $107,648 · Other+4 moreCommunity Action Services and Food Bank — $338,261 · Human ServicesCommunity Action Services an…Centro Hispano — $50,765 · Human ServicesCentro HispanoCANYON CREEK WOMENS CRISIS CENTER — $30,317 · Human ServicesCANYON CREEK WOMENS CRISIS C…TURN Community Services Inc — $23,769 · Human ServicesFAMILY SUPPORT CENTER OF SOUTHWESTERN UTAH — $18,364 · Human ServicesThe Center for Women and Children in Crisis — $94,512 · HealthThe Center for…The Rachel Covey Foundation — $38,466 · HealthThe Rachel Cov…Volunteer Care Clinic — $37,742 · HealthVolunteer Care…Mountainlands Community Health Center — $25,620 · HealthMountainlands …NOW I CAN FOUNDATION — $24,142 · HealthNOW I CAN FOUN…DAVIS BEHAVIORAL HEALTH INC — $10,000 · HealthIRON COUNTY CARE AND SHARE — $52,905 · Housing & ShelterRural Housing Development Corporation — $26,558 · Housing & ShelterProject Read — $24,057 · Education
Other$1,033,742Human Services$461,476Health$230,482Housing & Shelter$79,463Education$24,057

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetUtah Valley Family Support Center Inc — $571,715 over 7y, 13% of budgetCommunity Action Services and Food Bank — $338,261 over 8y, 0.9% of budgetRecreation and Habilitation Services (RAH) — $176,588 over 8y, 29% of budgetThe Center for Women and Children in Crisis — $94,512 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetALPINE HOUSE — $68,094 over 5y, 22% of budgetIRON COUNTY CARE AND SHARE — $52,905 over 5y, 2.7% of budgetCentro Hispano — $50,765 over 3y, 2.8% of budgetCommunity Health Connect — $42,806 over 5y, 6.5% of budgetThe Rachel Covey Foundation — $38,466 over 3y, 1.6% of budgetVolunteer Care Clinic — $37,742 over 4y, 72% of budgetCANYON CREEK WOMENS CRISIS CENTER — $30,317 over 5y, 0.8% of budgetRural Housing Development Corporation — $26,558 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF UTAH COUNTY — $25,636 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetMountainlands Community Health Center — $25,620 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetNOW I CAN FOUNDATION — $24,142 over 3y, 1.8% of budgetProject Read — $24,057 over 4y, 3.8% of budgetTURN Community Services Inc — $23,769 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetFAMILY SUPPORT CENTER OF SOUTHWESTERN UTAH — $18,364 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetDAVIS BEHAVIORAL HEALTH INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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.

Sorenson Legacy Found…Ihc Health Services I…George S and Dolores …The Miner FoundationThe Community Foundat…Dominion Energy Chari…Pacificorp Foundation…C Scott & Dorothy E W…The Ashton Family Fou…Raymond James Charita…American Online Givin…American Endowment Fo…
Sorenson Legacy FoundationUT29.9× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sorenson Legacy Foundation · Ihc Health Services Inc · George S and Dolores Dore Eccles Foundation · The Miner Foundation · The Community Foundation of Utah · Dominion Energy Charitable Foundation · Pacificorp Foundation Aka Pacific Power Foundation Aka Rocky Mountain Power Foundati · C Scott & Dorothy E Watkins Charitable Foundation · The Ashton Family Foundation · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · American Endowment 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 United Way of Central and Southern Utah 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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: 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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 23 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    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