· Private foundation
Arches 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k74 grants · $124k
- $10k–50k8 grants · $104k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $226k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CARBONDALE CLAY CENTER | $226,000 |
| CENTER FOR INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING | $15,000 |
| AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUN | $15,000 |
| LAWYERS COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | $15,000 |
| BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE | $15,000 |
| ON THE MEDIA NEW YORK PUBLIC RADIO | $12,000 |
| MOVEMENT VOTER FUND | $12,000 |
| ANDERSON RANCH ARTS CENTER | $10,000 |
| CENTER FOR PUBLIC INTEGRITY | $10,000 |
| DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS USA | $8,000 |
| UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC | $8,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $7,500 |
| ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE | $7,000 |
| WESTERN RESOURCE ADVOCATES | $6,000 |
| PRO PUBLICA | $5,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $21k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 4% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
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 — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +57% since the first grant, against +54% for the ones you funded once.
119 repeat relationships — 77 still active in FY2024, 42 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
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 FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $750 went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- CCCARBONDALE CLAY CENTER8× · 2017–2024 · $531k · revenue +854% · 30% of their budget
- ARANDERSON RANCH ARTS CENTER8× · 2017–2024 · $104k · revenue +29%
THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC8× · 2017–2024 · $99k · revenue +12%
Funded once
- AFASSOCIATION FOR THE CHRONICALLY MENone grant, 2018 · $55k
- AUALFRED UNIVERSITYone grant, 2017 · $50k · revenue +20%
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2020 · $15k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
Rocky mountain wild works to protect, connect, and restore wildlife and wild lands in the southern rocky mountain region. we work to secure the biodiversity of the mountains, plains, and desert ecosystems of colorado, wyoming, utah, and…
Be a catalyst! Ignite our community's passion for nature and science.
AIA Colorado,is the voice of the architecture profession in Colorado. Through advocacy, leadership development, education and resources for architects, the organization supports architecture professionals in designing a better world where…
To restore water to colorado's rivers.
To provide meaningful access to high quality, civil legal services in the pursuit of justice for as many low income persons and members of vulnerable populations throughout colorado as possible.
To broaden the nature of a liberal arts education; teach critical thinking about social & environmental issues; foster understanding of & respect for natural & human communities; & cultivate a sense of place that encourages personal,…
Building leaders to protect the west's land, air, and water.
Our work secures policies and elevates leaders that advance climate action and environmental justice. we help them do it, and hold them to it. we work for a colorado where every community can breathe clean air, drink clean water, protect…
Conservation legacy engages future leaders who protect, restore, and enhance our nation's lands through community-based service.in 2024, conservation legacy engaged 2,524 participants who completed over 1.5 million service hours on public…
Rogue Climate's mission is to empower Southern Oregon communities most impacted by climate change including low-income, rural, youth, seniors & communities of color, to win climate justice by organizing for clean energy, sustainable jobs &…
To conserve and steward the open lands and natural character of the headwaters of the colorado river in partnership with the local community.
To accelerate progress in interventions that harness Earths natural systems to stabilize the climate.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Aspen Institute Inc and the most unlike its peers is Rosenfield Art Foundation of Texas Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 35 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
113 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 113 of the 187 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
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 CARBONDALE CLAY CENTER ↗
- Who funds ANDERSON RANCH ARTS CENTER ↗
- Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
- Who funds The Art Base ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Western Resource Advocates ↗
- Who funds Rocky Mountain Institute ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR PUBLIC INTEGRITY ↗
- Who funds The Center for Investigative Reporting Inc ↗
- Who funds ALFRED UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds WILLIAM J BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE INC ↗
- Who funds THE CARTER CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds PRO PUBLICA INC ↗
- Who funds COLORADO WEST REGIONAL MENTAL HEALTH INC ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law ↗
- Who funds OFICINA LEGAL DEL PUEBLO UNIDO INC ↗
- Who funds WESTERN COLORADO ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL GREENGRANTS FUND ↗
- Who funds CARBONDALE ARTS ↗
- Who funds NPR FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL FUND FOR WOMEN INC ↗
- Who funds PUBLIC BROADCASTING OF COLORADO INC ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Aspen Community Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · Alpenglow Foundation · The Thrift Shop · Aspen Business Center Foundation · Brady Foundation · Western Colorado Community Foundation Inc · The Flunison Fund · The Denver Foundation · Rose Community Foundation · Ernst and Wilma Martens Foundation · The Thendara Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Arches 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.
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- American Whitewater — 5% of income from government
- Oregon Shakespeare Festival Association Inc — 0% of income from government
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 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.