Loading…
Loading…
Utah · Nonprofit
WOMEN TECH COUNCIL (Utah) is funded by 2 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $62,500 in grants to it, the largest being THE KAHLERT FOUNDATION INC ($55,000). 0 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
WOMEN TECH COUNCIL has grown faster than half of the 11,157 community improvement nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 11,157 community improvement nonprofits $100k–$1M, FY2024
Revenue, expenses and net assets — each indexed to 100 at its first filing year, so you read the trajectory, not the magnitude. The shaded band is where the middle 50% of its peers' revenue would sit, given their growth.
The funding model — what share of revenue comes from contributions, programs, investments and other sources — and whether it's shifting.
73% of WOMEN TECH COUNCIL’s revenue is contributions — more donation-reliant than the typical peer (59% for the typical peer).
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 2 of the last 4 reported years ran a deficit.
Grant support over time, funder by funder — shade shows the grant size each year.
From the IRS filings of WOMEN TECH COUNCIL’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
WOMEN TECH COUNCIL leans on a few funders — its largest provides 88% of grant income and the top three 100%; half comes from just 1 funder.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 1 funder to its left
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
WOMEN TECH COUNCIL draws 88% of its grant income from funders outside Utah — its reputation reaches beyond the state, across 2 states in all.
Grantmakers that don’t fund you yet, surfaced two ways: they back organizations that share your funders, or their grantees resemble your mission. The ones both signals agree on come first. Your 2 funders put you under-funded among the 320 organizations that share them.
From the co-funder graph (funders backing at least two comparable organizations, shrunk for grantee count, donor-advised and mega-funds excluded) and the universe embeddings. A research starting point; overlap is association, not a guarantee of fit.
Nonprofits whose mission and program text most resemble this one, by semantic similarity over the universe of US filings — the closest peers, and often the clearest route to shared or prospective funders.
Read directly from this organization’s own Form 990, as neutral context.
54% of spending goes to programs.
Every figure is read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML — this organization’s own return for FY2024 (financials across 2021–2024), and the filings of 2funders that report grants to it. “On record” means captured in the filings we have parsed — a funder that does not e-file, or whose grant detail is not itemized, will not appear. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind. view filing