· 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.
What it funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.
Where the money goes
Grants by size, and the largest recipients.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD | $1,250 |
| SAVE OUR CANYONS | $1,000 |
| MOUNTAIN TRAILS FOUNDATION | $1,000 |
| RESCUE MISSION | $100 |
| Individual grant recipient | $100 |
Does the money reach high-need areas?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.
Its 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. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
How this is measured
How this is measured
Who it funds again
Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.
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
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 65% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
How this is measured
Backed again, and grew
- MTMOUNTAIN TRAILS FOUNDATION8× · 2018–2025 · $10k · revenue +196%
- PAPROCTOR ACADEMY7× · 2017–2023 · $8k · revenue +45%
- PHPeace House Inc3× · 2022–2024 · $3k · revenue +43%
Funded once
- SLSummit Land Conservancygraduatedone grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +406%
- WSWINTER SPORTS SCHOOL IN PARK CITYgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $2k · revenue +40%
- VOVARIOUS ORGANIZATIONSone grant, 2018 · $1k
How this is measured
Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
Closest unfunded matches
The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
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.
Middle and high school MT bike team
Trails Utah is dedicated to trails advocacy, planning, funding, and construction in needed areas throughout the state.
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…
Improve utah's wetlands through hands-on conservation and community engagement
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.
Technical assistance for water and waste water systems
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.
Sierra watch secures conservation outcomes to protect the natural resources, mountain communities, and timeless values of the tahoe sierra.
How this is measured
8 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.
How this is measured
Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, 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.
Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee
Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding
A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
Co-funders
Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
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
How this is measured
How much its grantees rely on government
Each dot is one organization Wam Hamill Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Wam Hamill Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.
How this is measured
Play a game based on Wam Hamill’s filings →