Skip to content
Bright Mountain Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Bright Mountain 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.

$85k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Health$223kFood & Nutrition$111kCommunity Improvement$85kPhilanthropy$80kCrime & Legal$72kReligion$15kYouth Development$12kHuman Services$3k
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$15,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$321k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
COLORADO HEALTH NETWORK$15,000
CARE AND SHARE FOOD BANK$15,000
LATINO COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF COLO$15,000
COMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTER$15,000
LIFE QUEST FOUNDATION$15,000
BLUE SKY BRIDGE$10,000
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 (FY19–19, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%FREEDOM SERVICE DOGS: $3k → 8%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.

82%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$427k · 7 repeat orgs$93k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +36% since the first grant, against +27% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
2

Total granted

$427k
$78k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+36%
+27%

Still filing today

86%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 79% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthCommunity ImprovementCrime & LegalFood & NutritionHuman ServicesOther
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

  • CH
    COLORADO HEALTH NETWORK INC
    8× · 2018–2025 · $103k · revenue +76%
  • Care and Share Inc
    7× · 2019–2025 · $95k · revenue +36%
  • CR
    COMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTER INC
    8× · 2018–2025 · $85k · revenue +26%

Funded once

  • TC
    The Children's Health Fund
    one grant, 2017 · $75k · revenue -56%
  • FS
    FREEDOM SERVICE DOGS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $3k · revenue +27%
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
The Colorado Health Foundation
Health
2
Colorado Physician Health Program Corporation

The mission of the Colorado Physician Health Program Corporation is to promote the health and well-being of physicians and physician assistants through evaluation, treatment referral, support education and research.

Health
3
Community Foundation Serving Southwest Colorado

To develop and increase charitable giving that connects donors to community needs in Southwest Colorado and to support the nonprofit sector through granting and educational opportunities.

Philanthropy
4
Colorado Healing Fund

Establish a secure way for the public to contribute to victims of mass tragedy and to assist local communities with the financial, emotional, and physical needs of victims of mass tragedies in Colorado

Public Safety & Disaster
5
Colorado Casa Inc

Colorado CASA is a nonprofit organization that works to strengthen local CASA organizations and advocate for children in the child welfare system.

Civil Rights
6
Colorado Food Cluster Inc

Provide opportunities for all to thrive by offering free food resources to communities.

Food & Nutrition
7
Community Shares of Colorado Inc

We connect coloradans to the charities and causes they care about most. our purpose is to raise and allocate money to the member organizations, increase public visibility of member organizations, promote cooperation between member…

Philanthropy
8
Colorado Digital Health

Prime health advances health justice, equity, access quality and cost through innovation, collaboration, and community building.

Health
9
Center for Nonprofit Excellence

The Center for Nonprofit Excellence strengthens Southern Colorado's nonprofit sector through leadership and resource development, advocacy and collaboration. Together, with our partners, we are co-creating a vibrant community in the Pikes…

—
10
Colorado Museum of Natural History

Be a catalyst! Ignite our community's passion for nature and science.

Arts & Culture
11
Coloradans for Food Justice

Coloradans for food justice is building community power by making sure that every eater in colorado has a voice to make transformative change that represents a more just food system by mobilizing values-driven voters statewide.

—
12
Colorado Gives Foundation

We connect people, ideas, and nonprofits to make good happen. our vision is that all of jeffco is thriving.

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Community Resource Center Inc; the most unlike its peers is Meals On Wheels of Canon City Colorado Inc. 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

10 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. 10 of the 12 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COLORADO HEALTH NETWORK INC: $102,500 · HealthCOLORADO HEALTH NETWORK INCMETRO CRISIS SERVICES INC: $45,000 · HealthMETRO CRISIS SERVICES INCThe Children's Health Fund: $75,000 · OtherThe Children's Health …MEALS ON WHEELS OF CANON CITY COLORADO INC: $16,000 · OtherMEALS ON WHEELS OF CAN…LIFE QUEST FOUNDATION: $15,000 · OtherLIFE QUEST FOUNDATIONVAIL MOUNTAIN HOCKEY CLUB: $12,000 · OtherVAIL MOUNTAIN HOCKEY C…Care and Share Inc: $95,000 · Food & NutritionCare and Share In…COMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTER INC: $85,000 · Community ImprovementCOMMUNITY RESOUR…LATINO COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF COLORADO INC: $75,000 · Arts & CultureLATINO COMMUNI…CHILD AND FAMILY ADVOCACY PROGRAM: $71,500 · Crime & LegalCHILD AND FAM…Rose Community Foundation: $5,000 · PhilanthropyFREEDOM SERVICE DOGS INC: $3,000 · Human Services
Health$147,500Other$118,000Food & Nutrition$95,000Community Improvement$85,000Arts & Culture$75,000Crime & Legal$71,500Philanthropy$5,000Human Services$3,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCOLORADO HEALTH NETWORK INC: $102,500 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetCare and Share Inc: $95,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTER INC: $85,000 over 8y, 1.0% of budgetLATINO COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF COLORADO INC: $75,000 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetThe Children's Health Fund: $75,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetCHILD AND FAMILY ADVOCACY PROGRAM: $71,500 over 8y, 1.0% of budgetMETRO CRISIS SERVICES INC: $45,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS OF CANON CITY COLORADO INC: $16,000 over 2y, 9.3% of budgetRose Community Foundation: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFREEDOM SERVICE DOGS INC: $3,000 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.

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.

The Denver FoundationColorado Gives Founda…The Colorado Health F…Amazonsmile Foundation
The Denver FoundationCO15.2× affinity5 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Denver Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · The Colorado Health Foundation · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Bright Mountain Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Bright Mountain 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%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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 12 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 Bright Mountain’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home