Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Wam Hamill Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$3k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$1k
Largest
01What you fund
0198% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Recreation & Sports$13kEducation$12kHealth$9kEnvironment$7kHuman Services$3kPublic Benefit$200Housing & Shelter$100Philanthropy$100Other$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$1,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$69k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PLANNED PARENTHOOD$1,250
SAVE OUR CANYONS$1,000
MOUNTAIN TRAILS FOUNDATION$1,000
RESCUE MISSION$100
Individual grant recipient$100
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 (FY22–24, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 5%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%PEACE HOUSE INC: $1k → 5%PEACE HOUSE INC: $1k → 5%PEACE HOUSE INC: $1k → 5%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.

74%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$34k · 6 repeat orgs$12k to everyone else

6 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
7

Total granted

$34k
$11k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+45%
+138%

Still filing today

83%
29%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 65% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k 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
EnvironmentEducationHuman ServicesOther

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

  • MT
    MOUNTAIN TRAILS FOUNDATION
    8× · 2018–2025 · $10k · revenue +196%
  • PA
    PROCTOR ACADEMY
    7× · 2017–2023 · $8k · revenue +45%
  • PH
    Peace House Inc
    3× · 2022–2024 · $3k · revenue +43%

Funded once

  • SL
    Summit Land Conservancygraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +138%
  • WS
    WINTER SPORTS SCHOOL IN PARK CITYgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $2k · revenue +40%
  • VO
    VARIOUS ORGANIZATIONS
    one grant, 2018 · $1k

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
Utah Public Lands Alliance
Education
2
Utah Geological Foundation
3
Park City Day School

Park city day school educates children from preschool to 8th grade with a mission to prepare and inspire our students to lead great and giving lives.

Education
4
Pchsmtb

Middle and high school MT bike team

5
Trails Utah

Trails Utah is dedicated to trails advocacy, planning, funding, and construction in needed areas throughout the state.

Environment
6
Utah Open Lands Conservation Association Inc

Utah Open Lands' mission is to preserve and protect open space, in perpetuity, in order to maintain Utah's natural heritage and quality of life for present and future generations. The purpose of Utah Open Lands is to permanently protect…

Environment
7
Wasatch Wigeons Association

Improve utah's wetlands through hands-on conservation and community engagement

Animals
8
Scenic Montana Trails
9
Utah Water Ways Inc

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.

Environment
10
Rural Water Association of Utah

Technical assistance for water and waste water systems

Public Benefit
11
Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah

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.

Environment
12
Sierra Watch

Sierra watch secures conservation outcomes to protect the natural resources, mountain communities, and timeless values of the tahoe sierra.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mountain Trails Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Utah Rivers Council Inc. 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

8 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 16 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

MOUNTAIN TRAILS FOUNDATION — $9,560 · EnvironmentMOUNTAIN TRAILS FOUNDATIONSummit Land Conservancy — $5,000 · EnvironmentSummit Land ConservancyUTAH RIVERS COUNCIL INC — $1,000 · EnvironmentUTAH RIVERS COUNCIL INCPROCTOR ACADEMY — $8,300 · EducationPROCTOR ACADEMYTHE UNIVERSITY OF PUGET SOUND — $4,000 · EducationTHE UNIVERSITY OF PUGET SOUNDWINTER SPORTS SCHOOL IN PARK CITY — $2,000 · EducationWINTER SPORTS SCHOOL IN PARK CITYPLANNED PARENTHOOD — $8,250 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOODVARIOUS ORGANIZATIONS — $1,350 · OtherVARIOUS ORGANIZATIONSCURE ALZHEIMERS FUND — $1,000 · OtherCURE ALZHEIMERS FUNDPARK CITY SKI & SNOWBOARD — $1,000 · OtherPARK CITY SKI & SNOWBOARDCITIZENS COMMITTEE TO SAVE OUR — $1,000 · OtherCITIZENS COMMITTEE TO SAVE OUR+4 more — $600 · OtherPeace House Inc — $3,000 · Human Services
Environment$15,560Education$14,300Other$13,200Human Services$3,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetMOUNTAIN TRAILS FOUNDATION — $9,560 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetPROCTOR ACADEMY — $8,300 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetSummit Land Conservancy — $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE UNIVERSITY OF PUGET SOUND — $4,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetPeace House Inc — $3,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetUTAH RIVERS COUNCIL INC — $1,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCITIZENS COMMITTEE TO SAVE OUR — $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

  • Who funds MOUNTAIN TRAILS FOUNDATION
  • Who funds PROCTOR ACADEMY
  • Who funds Summit Land Conservancy
  • Who funds THE UNIVERSITY OF PUGET SOUND
  • Who funds Peace House Inc
  • Who funds WINTER SPORTS SCHOOL IN PARK CITY
  • Who funds UTAH RIVERS COUNCIL INC
  • Who funds CITIZENS COMMITTEE TO SAVE OUR

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.

PatagoniaorgCA13.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Patagoniaorg · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 Wam Hamill 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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 16 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-PF 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