Skip to content
Woolley Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Woolley Family Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$16k
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2022 to 2024.

International$7.1MReligion$1.7MHuman Services$325kArts & Culture$302kYouth Development$175kEducation$142kHealth$90kEnvironment$70kOther$0
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $1k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $15k
$15,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$4k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SIAOSI BROWN DIALYSIS CENTER$15,000
PEACE HOUSE$1,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY22–24, $325k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%PEACE HOUSE: $10k → 5%PEACE HOUSE: $5k → 5%PEACE HOUSE: $1k → 5%AMERICAN INDIAN SERVICES: $177k → 8%AMERICAN INDIAN SERVICES: $132k → 8%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
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.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

7%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$687k · 6 repeat orgs$9.2M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +20% since the first grant, against -1% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
25

Total granted

$687k
$9.2M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+20%
-1%

Still filing today

100%
48%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 6% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24
EducationReligionYouth DevelopmentHuman ServicesArts & CultureAnimalsOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • HC
    HALE CENTRE THEATRE
    2× · 2022–2023 · $217k · revenue +14%
  • PP
    Paso Pacifico
    2× · 2022–2023 · $60k · revenue +20%
  • MI
    Mentors International
    2× · 2022–2023 · $60k · revenue +73%

Funded once

  • TC
    THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTE
    one grant, 2022 · $7.0M
  • MG
    MORE GOOD FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $1.0M · revenue -35%
  • BI
    BYU Intl Ctr for Law Religion Studi
    one grant, 2022 · $500k
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.

04Its field

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.

1
Utah Shakespeare Festival Foundation
Arts & Culture
2
Utah Geological Foundation
—
3
Real Salt Lake Foundation
Human Services
4
Mormon Scholars Foundation
Education
5
Sunstone Education Foundation Incorporated

The mission of the Sunstone Education Foundation is to sponsor open forums of Mormon thought and experiences.

Religion
6
International Buddhist Education Foundation
Education
7
Samuel H Smith Foundation

Historial Research and Preservation

Human Services
8
University of Utah Foundation

Provide support to the University of Utah Growth Capital Partners Foundation in Charitable, Educational and Scientific purposes.

Philanthropy
9
English Skills Learning Center

Integrates and strengthens communities through English language, literacy, and skills-based education for adult learners, delivered using a combination of professional staff and trained community volunteers.

Education
10
Utah Leads

Utah Leads set out to understand what makes our information ecosystem in Utah unique, who is influencing policy formation in Utah, how that influence works in practice through multiple channels and across channels, and what policy…

—
11
International Leadership Foundation for Adventist Colleges and Universities

To support the scholarship for international leadership program

Education
12
Salt Lake Education Foundation

To promote student success in the Salt Lake City School District by using private donations to supplement children's educational experiences.

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Utahs First Lady Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Siaosi Brown Dialysis Center. 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

19 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. 19 of the 32 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/19
Grantees still filing
10/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTE: $7,000,000 · OtherTHE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTEBYU Intl Ctr for Law Religion Studi: $500,000 · OtherBYU Intl Ctr for Law Religion Studi+15 more: $391,000 · OtherMORE GOOD FOUNDATION: $1,000,000 · EducationMORE GOOD FO…+4 more: $60,500 · Education+4 moreAmerican Indian Services: $309,000 · Human ServicesPeace House Inc: $16,000 · Human ServicesHALE CENTRE THEATRE: $216,848 · Arts & CultureUTAHS FIRST LADY FOUNDATION: $100,000 · Youth DevelopmentFULLMER LEGACY FOUNDATION: $50,000 · Youth DevelopmentKEN GARFF FOR GOOD: $25,000 · Youth DevelopmentTHE INTERPRETER FOUNDATION: $100,000 · ReligionTHE JOHN A & LEAH D WIDTSOE FOUNDATION FKA THE JOHN A WIDTSOE FOUNDATION: $50,000 · ReligionBOOK OF MORMON CENTRAL: $10,000 · ReligionPaso Pacifico: $60,000 · Animals
Other$7,891,000Education$1,060,500Human Services$325,000Arts & Culture$216,848Youth Development$175,000Religion$160,000Animals$60,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMORE GOOD FOUNDATION: $1,000,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetAmerican Indian Services: $309,000 over 2y, 4.1% of budgetHALE CENTRE THEATRE: $216,848 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetUTAHS FIRST LADY FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 1y, 7.0% of budgetTHE INTERPRETER FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 1y, 6.8% of budgetPaso Pacifico: $60,000 over 2y, 8.5% of budgetMentors International: $60,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetFULLMER LEGACY FOUNDATION: $50,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetSTANFORD PROFESSIONALS IN REAL ESTATE INC: $25,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetCOMMUNITY NURSING SERVICE: $25,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetThe Constitution Education Foundation: $25,000 over 1y, 10.0% of budgetKEN GARFF FOR GOOD: $25,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetPeace House Inc: $16,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetSIAOSI BROWN DIALYSIS CENTER: $15,000 over 1y, 31% of budgetBOOK OF MORMON CENTRAL: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetWASATCH ADAPTIVE SPORTS INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetHelp Start Education Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetINTERNATIONAL LANGUAGE PROGRAMS INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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.

Sorenson Legacy Found…Larry H Miller and Ga…George S and Dolores …The Ashton Family Fou…Beesley Family Founda…University ImpactThe Community Foundat…Duane and Marci Shaw …The Susan Ileene Wirt…Bertin Family Foundat…Clark and Christine I…Wcf Foundation
Sorenson Legacy FoundationUT25.8× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sorenson Legacy Foundation · Larry H Miller and Gail Miller Family Foundation · George S and Dolores Dore Eccles Foundation · The Ashton Family Foundation · Beesley Family Foundation · University Impact · The Community Foundation of Utah · Duane and Marci Shaw Foundation Inc · The Susan Ileene Wirthlin Foundation · Bertin Family Foundation · Clark and Christine Ivory Foundation · Wcf Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Woolley Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Woolley Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Woolley Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Woolley Family Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 32 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Woolley Family’s filings →

    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