Loading…
· Private foundation
AKERS FOUNDATION
This foundation does not accept unsolicited requests — it funds preselected organizations.
$339k
Granted FY2024
3
Grants
1
Communities
$313k
Largest
01What you fund
0195% classified
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2024.
Health$1.5MEducation$46kHuman Services$24kCommunity Improvement$20kPhilanthropy$5kOther$93k
02beneath the categories
Past the labels — and the year it shifted
Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.
…and in their own words, year by year
2018
—
2019
—
2020
—
2021
aid
2022
aid
2023
aid
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2024 · 3 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k1 grant · $1k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
- $250k+1 grant · $313k
$25,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$205k
Total assets
Largest grants
- CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL COLORADO FOUNDATION$313,238
- THE COLORADO GRAND INC$25,000
- THE BISON FOUNDATION$1,200
02The need
04
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
show:
Your human-services grants (FY21–24, $24k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12% — the area typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
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; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
03Your edge
repeat funding
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
97%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.7M · 6 repeat orgs$51k to everyone else
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +132% since the first grant, against -10% for the ones you funded once.
6 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
6
8
Total granted
$1.7M
$51k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+132%
-10%
Still filing today
100%
63%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
HealthEducationPhilanthropyCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesOther
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- CHChildren's Hospital Colorado Foundation5× · 2020–2024 · $1.4M · revenue +42%
- CHCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL COLORADO2× · 2018–2019 · $147k · revenue +86%
- TCTHE COLORADO GRAND INC3× · 2022–2024 · $53k · revenue +96%
Funded once
- CSColorado State Patrolone grant, 2021 · $16k
- BBBig Brothers Big Sisters of Middle Tennesseeone grant, 2017 · $10k
- BPBRIDGE PROJECTone grant, 2018 · $10k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
04Your field
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
1
The Colorado Health Foundation
Health
2
The Colorado Trust
Philanthropy
3
Usa Triathlon of Colorado
The mission of USA Triathlon of Colorado (USAT) is to grow, inspire, and support the triathlon community.
Recreation & Sports
4
Colorado Gives Foundation
We connect people, ideas, and nonprofits to make good happen.
Philanthropy
5
Colorado School of Mines Foundation
To provide financial resource development and support to the colorado school of mines.
Education
6
Colorado West Healthcare System
Improve the health and quality of life of the individuals and communities we serve.
Health
7
Colorado Business Development Foundation
Colorado Business Development Foundation develops and funds small business resources
Philanthropy
8
Colorado Health Institute
Health
9
The Colorado Parks Foundation Inc
Recreation & Sports
10
Colorado Dental Association Foundation
The CDA Foundation advances access to oral healthcare through charitable giving, supports the future of the profession through dental school scholarships and promotes dental professional wellbeing.
Health
11
Colorado Solar Energy Industries Assoc
Our mission is to expand solar and storage markets and to generate jobs and prosperity for the people of Colorado. Together with hundreds of solar and storage business members we work to advance clean energy policies, remove market…
—
12
Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Colorado
To provide high-quality, affordable health care services to improve the health of our members and the communities we serve.
Health
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Children's Hospital Colorado Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Children's Hospital Colorado. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network
11 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2024.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Health$1,542,481Other$93,048Education$45,500Human Services$24,200Community Improvement$20,100Philanthropy$4,500
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds Children's Hospital Colorado Foundation ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL COLORADO ↗
- Who funds THE COLORADO GRAND INC ↗
- Who funds Alliance for Choice in Education ↗
- Who funds The Bison Foundation ↗
- Who funds Colorado Energy Foundation ↗
- Who funds Colorado Seminary ↗
- Who funds MILE HIGH FIVE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Tennessee Kidney Foundation ↗
- Who funds 300SL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds COLORADO OIL AND GAS ASSOCIATION ↗
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organisation AKERS FOUNDATION funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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. An association, not a claim that your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
05Through Plinth
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: Colorado Energy Foundation.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
low risk
~12 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 6 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
6 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 24.0× since.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 842600843 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on Colorado Energy Foundation, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 12 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
- On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 5% of their budget — diversified.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to Akers Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Akers Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines