Skip to content

· Private foundation

Acclivity 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.

$100k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2023 to 2024.

Education$26kHuman Services$23kCommunity Improvement$20kPhilanthropy$20kArts & Culture$5kFood & Nutrition$3kYouth Development$2k
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $20k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $80k
$10,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$2.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Springs Rescue Mission$25,000
Pikes Peak Community Foundation$25,000
Foundation for Colorado Springs Future$10,000
North Dakota Community Foundation$10,000
UND Alumni Association Foundation$10,000
The Salvation Army$5,000
TESSA$4,000
Homeward Pikes Peak$4,000
The Place$4,000
Empty Stocking Fund$3,000
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 (FY24–25, $38k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%Springs Rescue Mission: $25k → 9%Springs Rescue Mission: $5k → 9%The Place: $4k → 9%TESSA: $4k → 9%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.

59%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$88k · 5 repeat orgs$62k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +26% since the first grant, against -22% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
6

Total granted

$88k
$40k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+26%
-22%

Still filing today

40%
17%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 66% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $22k went to new ones.

50%100%’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’23’24’25
Human ServicesPhilanthropyCommunity ImprovementHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • TS
    THE SPRINGS RESCUE MISSION
    2× · 2024–2025 · $30k · revenue -8%
  • FF
    FOUNDATION FOR COLORADO SPRINGS FUTURE
    3× · 2023–2025 · $30k · revenue +26%
  • MC
    Mt Carmel Veterans Center
    2× · 2023–2024 · $15k

Funded once

  • UO
    University of North Dakota
    one grant, 2024 · $10k
  • AF
    AIR FORCE ACADEMY FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2024 · $10k · revenue -22%
  • G
    Goodwill
    one grant, 2023 · $7k
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
Police Foundation of Colorado Springs

To build effective partnerships that support the cs police dept and local community

Philanthropy
2
Community Health Partnership (Chp)

Community health partnership (chp) was founded in 1992 as a collaborative effort focused on improving coordination between local health care providers. over the decades, the organization's work has expanded in response to community needs.…

Health
3
The Gathering Place a Refuge for Rebuilding Lives

We are community of safety and hope where positive relationships, choice, and essential resources transform lives. guiding principles: we serve women, children and transgender individuals who are experiencing poverty or homelessness. we…

Housing & Shelter
4
Impact Development Fund

Impact development fund helps people within our underserved communities seek fulfillment for themselves and their families by providing access to affordable living. we create these opportunities by delivering flexible capital to nonprofit…

Housing & Shelter
5
The Colorado Health Foundation
Health
6
Pikes Peak Athletic Foundation
Recreation & Sports
7
Family Housing Network of Fort Collins Inc

Faith Family Hospitality's mission is to support families experiencing homelessness to achieve sustainable self-sufficiency in a timely and dignified manner. This interfaith volunteer effort coordinates the work of 30 diverse Fort Collins…

Human Services
8
Pikes Peak Real Estate Foundation

To receive manage, sell, steward, and develop real estate and related assets for the benefit of our community.

Housing & Shelter
9
Metropolitan Denver Homeless Initiative Inc

Mission: leading and advancing collaboration to end homelessness in our region. vision: dedicated to everyone in the metro region having a safe, stable place to call home. values: committed to core values that bring people home: -…

Housing & Shelter
10
Suicide Prevention Partnership-Pikes Pea

The mission of pikes peak suicide prevention partnership is to unite the community in addressing suicide in the pikes peak region through education, intervention, and positive motivation.

Health
11
The Colorado Parks Foundation Inc
Recreation & Sports
12
Denver Police Foundation

To act as an independent and unique funding and advocacy resource for the denver police department to enhance public safety and law enforcement in the denver community.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Pikes Peak Community Foundation; the most unlike its peers is North Dakota Community Foundation. 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 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 17 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
2/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Mt Carmel Veterans Center: $15,000 · OtherMt Carmel Veterans CenterUniversity of North Dakota: $10,000 · OtherUniversity of North DakotaUND Alumni Association Foundation: $10,000 · OtherUND Alumni Association FoundationThe Salvation Army: $7,500 · OtherThe Salvation ArmyGoodwill: $7,000 · OtherGoodwillHEROES Scholarship Fund - UCCS: $6,000 · OtherHEROES Scholarship Fund - UCCSEmpty Stocking Fund: $5,500 · OtherEmpty Stocking FundPBS: $5,000 · OtherPBS+1 more: $1,500 · OtherPIKES PEAK COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $35,000 · PhilanthropyPIKES PEAK COMMUNITY FOUNDATIONNORTH DAKOTA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $12,500 · PhilanthropyNORTH DAKOTA COMMUNITY FOUNDATIONAIR FORCE ACADEMY FOUNDATION: $10,000 · PhilanthropyAIR FORCE ACADEMY FOUNDATIONTHE SPRINGS RESCUE MISSION: $30,000 · Human ServicesTHE SPRINGS RESCUE MI…TESSA: $4,000 · Human ServicesTESSAThe Place: $4,000 · Human ServicesThe PlaceFOUNDATION FOR COLORADO SPRINGS FUTURE: $30,000 · Community ImprovementFOUNDATION FOR CO…Homeward Pikes Peak: $4,000 · Housing & Shelter
Other$67,500Philanthropy$57,500Human Services$38,000Community Improvement$30,000Housing & Shelter$4,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPIKES PEAK COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $35,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE SPRINGS RESCUE MISSION: $30,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR COLORADO SPRINGS FUTURE: $30,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetNORTH DAKOTA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $12,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAIR FORCE ACADEMY FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTESSA: $4,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetThe Place: $4,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHomeward Pikes Peak: $4,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

  • Who funds PIKES PEAK COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE SPRINGS RESCUE MISSION ↗
  • Who funds FOUNDATION FOR COLORADO SPRINGS FUTURE ↗
  • Who funds NORTH DAKOTA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds AIR FORCE ACADEMY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds TESSA ↗
  • Who funds The Place ↗
  • Who funds Homeward Pikes Peak ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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.

    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 17 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Acclivity’s filings →

    More from the funding graph