· Private foundation
Aspen Business Center 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 $10k117 grants · $319k
- $10k–50k35 grants · $523k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $100k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ASPEN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION | $40,000 |
| WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK | $35,000 |
| ASPEN VALLEY LAND TRUST | $30,000 |
| COMMUNITY BUILDERS | $30,000 |
| WILDLANDSCAPES | $25,000 |
| ASPEN CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES | $25,000 |
| ECOFLIGHT | $20,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $20,000 |
| GRAND CANYON TRUST | $15,000 |
| PRINCETON UNIVERSITY HOCKEY | $15,000 |
| ASPEN JOURNALISM | $15,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $15,000 |
| NATURE CONSERVANCY | $15,000 |
| PHILLIPS ACADEMY ANDOVER | $12,000 |
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, $156k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 0% 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.
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 +84% since the first grant, against +49% for the ones you funded once.
164 repeat relationships — 138 still active in FY2024, 26 since wound down; 13 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, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $76k 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
- EECOFLIGHT8× · 2017–2024 · $170k · revenue +154%
- AVASPEN VALLEY LAND TRUST6× · 2017–2024 · $145k · revenue +177%
- CBCOMMUNITY BUILDERS8× · 2017–2024 · $141k · revenue +7%
Funded once
- TUTUSK USA INCone grant, 2017 · $40k
- TATHE ARTS CAMPUS AT WILLITSone grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue -6%
- MEMARA ELEPHANT PROJECT USAone grant, 2023 · $25k
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…
To unite, elevate and empower colorado's conservation community to protect the lands and waters that define our state.
To conserve and steward the open lands and natural character of the headwaters of the colorado river in partnership with the local community.
To empower visitors and locals to explore, learn about and protect the spectacular public lands of Southwest Colorado.
The Boulder Watershed Collective is a 501c3 non-profit stakeholder-driven organization established to address forested watershed health,resiliency and stewardship. We have three program areas: ClimateAdaptation and Resilience Watershed…
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,…
The wyoming outdoor council's mission is to protect wyoming's environment and quality of life now and for future generations.
The aspen skiing company environment foundation is a nonprofit organization dedicated to the enhancement and protection of the environmental quality of the roaring fork valley region. we support projects that promote environmental…
Building leaders to protect the west's land, air, and water.
To accelerate progress in interventions that harness Earths natural systems to stabilize the climate.
The Center brings together mission-focused, nonpolitical organizations working at the confluence of land and water science, education, and stewardship to magnify our impact and ensure the longevity of our natural resources for future…
Aspen Wildfire Foundation proactivly reduces the destructive consequences of wildfire in the Aspen fire district and its connected landscapes. Since 2021 their work is in adapting our community toward living with fire.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Conservation Colorado and the most unlike its peers is Aspen Fly Right. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 24 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 16% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 9% 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.
62 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. 62 of the 204 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 ASPEN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ECOFLIGHT ↗
- Who funds ASPEN VALLEY LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY BUILDERS ↗
- Who funds ASPEN CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES ↗
- Who funds Children's Hospital Colorado Foundation ↗
- Who funds Aspen Journalism ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds Bridging Bionics Foundation ↗
- Who funds MUSIC ASSOCIATES OF ASPEN INC ↗
- Who funds WILDERNESS WORKSHOP ↗
- Who funds WE-CYCLE ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds THE WILDERNESS LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds Huts for Vets ↗
- Who funds ASPEN VALLEY SKISNOWBOARD CLUB INC ↗
- Who funds ASPEN HISTORICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds COLORADO WATER TRUST ↗
- Who funds ASPEN VALLEY HOSPITAL FOUNDATION ↗
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 · Brady Foundation · Arches Foundation · The Thrift Shop · Western Colorado Community Foundation Inc · Castaways Foundation · Ernst and Wilma Martens Foundation · Fred and Elli Iselin Foundation · Aspen Skiing Company Environment Foundation · Our Part co Marsha Soffer
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 Aspen Business Center 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Aspen Business Center Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Aspen Business Center Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.