· Private foundation
6s Foundation
Its FY2026 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
Read this first · the figures below need context
57% of 6s Foundation’s FY2026 grant dollars went to Wet Mtn Valley Community Foundation, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2026 names 2 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2022, the last year 6s Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 6 organizations, $307k. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
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.
By grant size · FY2022
- Under $10k1 grant · $5k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $82k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $220k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| COLORADO OPEN LANDS | $110,000 |
| SCHOOL SISTERS OF NOTRE DAME | $60,000 |
| THE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $50,000 |
| JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY | $25,000 |
| ST VINCENT DE PAUL SOCIETY OF BALTIMORE | $25,000 |
| WET MOUNTAIN VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $20,000 |
| HISTORIC PINES RANCH PRESERVATION ASSOCIATION | $12,000 |
| HIGH MOUNTAIN HAY FEVER FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION | $5,000 |
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 (FY18–22, $155k) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
How this is measured
How this is measured
Where the work is directed
The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.
About 46% of 6s Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.
How this is measured
Who it funds again
Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.
Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +54% since the first grant, against +15% for those funded once.
10 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2022, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call). Read against FY2022, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
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 FY2026, 63% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $30k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
How this is measured
Backed again, and grew
- COCOLORADO OPEN LANDS9× · 2017–2026 · $375k · revenue +215%
- SVST VINCENT DE PAUL OF BALTIMORE INC5× · 2018–2022 · $155k · revenue +46%
JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY2× · 2021–2022 · $50k · revenue +40%
Funded once
- GPGRACE PLACEone grant, 2018 · $25k
- CCCROHN'S & COLITIS FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +15%
- POPAWS ON THE GO INCone grant, 2021 · $5k
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.
Maintain the swan valley's unique natural resources and ensure that a vibrant human community can sustain itself through stewardship, education, economic viability, and conservation on public and private lands.
Vision: a healthy and resilient big thompson watershed benefitting fish, wildlife, and the people itserves through collaborative efforts for current and future generations. mission: working with others to take action that protects and…
Advancing sustainability in the western area of the united states through a series of programs and activities designed to promote better ranching practices. a strong focus is to provide ranchers with the information, tools, technical…
Jackson hole wildlife foundation advances wildlife conservation driven by science, collaboration, and a community of volunteers.
Inspiring communities to save wildlife for future generations.
The mission of the crested butte land trust is to forever protect and steward open lands for vistas, recreation, wildlife and ranching, thus contributing to the preservation of gunnison countys unique heritage and quality of life
Conserving colorado's western heritage and working landscapes for the benefit of future generations.
The mission of the grand canyon trust is to safeguard the wonders of the grand canyon and the colorado plateau, while supporting the rights of its native peoples.
To ensure coast redwood forests in the santa cruz mountains thrive for generations to come. since 1900, sempervirens has protected more than 36,000 acres. learn more about our mission, vision, and strategic plan through 2030 at:…
The wood river land trust's mission is to protect and sustain the treasured landscapes and life-giving waters of the wood river valley and to inspire love for this special place for generations to come.
How this is measured
11 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 11 of the 19 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.
- Who funds WET MTN VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds COLORADO OPEN LANDS ↗
- Who funds ST VINCENT DE PAUL OF BALTIMORE INC ↗
- Who funds JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY FOUNDATION BOULDER COUNTY ↗
- Who funds VALLEY ASSISTED LIVING INC ↗
- Who funds SAN ISABEL LAND PROTECTION TRUST ↗
- Who funds HISTORIC PINES RANCH PRESERVATION ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds HIGH MOUNTAIN HAY FEVER FESTIVAL ↗
- Who funds CROHN'S & COLITIS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds DARK SKIES INC ↗
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: Wet Mtn Valley Community Foundation · Amazonsmile Foundation
How this is measured
How much its grantees rely on government
Each dot is one organization 6s Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from 6s Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.
- St Vincent De Paul of Baltimore Inc: 40% of income from government
- Johns Hopkins University: 12% of income from government
How this is measured
Play a game based on 6s’ filings →