Skip to content
Burns Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Burns Family 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.

$31k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Health$192kEnvironment$14kYouth Development$10kHuman Services$3kCrime & Legal$2kCivil Rights$1kPhilanthropy$500Other$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $6k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
$5,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$634k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BOULDER COMMUNITY HEALTH$25,000
BOULDER CANCER FIGHTERS$5,000
Individual grant recipient$500
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 (FY19–23, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT: $100 → 14%THERE WITH CARE: $2k → 12%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.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$203k · 5 repeat orgs$49k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 2 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

5
13

Total granted

$203k
$48k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+31%
+53%

Still filing today

60%
54%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $500 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
HealthHuman ServicesPublic BenefitEnvironmentOther
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

  • BC
    BOULDER COMMUNITY HEALTH
    6× · 2020–2025 · $156k · revenue +31%
  • BC
    BOULDER CANCER FIGHTERS
    5× · 2021–2025 · $25k · revenue +29%
  • TS
    THE SENTENCING PROJECT
    2× · 2020–2021 · $2k · revenue +129%

Funded once

  • BC
    BOULDER COMMUNITY HEALTHANCHOR POINT MENTAL HEALTH
    one grant, 2018 · $15k
  • AS
    AMERICAN SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS
    one grant, 2020 · $13k
  • BC
    BOULDER CITY HOSPITAL GALA
    one grant, 2019 · $9k
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
Mental Health Center of Boulder County Inc

Partnering to improve quality of life as a nonprofit organization dedicated to mental health and wellness. healing is our purpose, help is our promise, health is our passion.

—
2
Summit Community Care Clinic Inc

Provide exceptional, integrated, patient-centered health care services designed to meet the needs of all patients, particularly those who experience barriers to accessing care, regardless of their ability to pay.

Health
3
Colorado West Inc

We rebuild lives and inspire hope by providing exceptional mental health and addiction recovery care strengthening the health and vitality of our communities.

Health
4
Wyoming Foundation for Cancer Care Inc

To reduce the impact of cancer on wyoming residents diagnosed with cancer by providing non-medical, charitable financial assistance and by providing free education and screening opportunities to residents not diagnosed with cancer.

Human Services
5
Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council

Cbhc's mission is to support community resilience, guide behavioral health innovation, and enhance individual well-being throughout colorado by supporting colorado's community behavioral health safety net providers.

Health
6
Cancer Resource Centers of Mendo Co

Cancer education, prevention, and patient navigation

Health
7
Banner -University Medical Group

Assist banner health complete its mission to make health care easier so life can be better by providing integrated & coordinated care & population health management.

Health
8
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
9
Colorectal Cancer Alliance

The mission of the colorectal cancer alliance is end colon and rectal cancer and support the nearly 50,000 afflicted with this disease each year. this is achieved by supporting preventative measures, accelerating research toward cures, and…

Health
10
Colorado Veterans Resource Coalition
Health
11
Boulder Valley Women's Health Center Inc

Our mission is to provide high quality and equitable reproductive and sexual health services, abortion, and education to all people, regardless of any barriers to healthcare that they may face.

—
12
Western States Cancer Research Ncorp

To bring the benefits of cancer research to physicians and their patients by offering the latest advancements in cancer prevention and treatment research available through cancer clinical trials.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is There With Care; the most unlike its peers is Rise Against Suicide. 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

11 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. 11 of the 20 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BOULDER COMMUNITY HEALTH: $156,250 · HealthBOULDER COMMUNITY HEALTHBOULDER CANCER FIGHTERS: $25,000 · HealthBOULDER CANCER FIGHTERS+3 more: $6,010 · HealthBOULDER COMMUNITY HEALTHANCHOR POINT MENTAL HEALTH: $15,000 · OtherBOULDER COMMUNITY HEALTHANC…AMERICAN SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS: $12,500 · OtherAMERICAN SUSTAINABLE BUSINE…B STRONG RIDEBOULDER COM: $10,000 · OtherB STRONG RIDEBOULDER COMB STRONG RIDEBOULDER COMMUNITY HEALTH: $10,000 · OtherB STRONG RIDEBOULDER COMMUN…BOULDER CITY HOSPITAL GALA: $8,900 · OtherBOULDER CITY HOSPITAL GALA+5 more: $4,510 · Other+5 moreTHERE WITH CARE: $2,000 · Human ServicesWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $100 · Human ServicesWILD BEAR NATURE CENTER: $1,000 · EnvironmentTHE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF LOUISVILLE INC: $500 · PhilanthropyCOLORADO VETERANS SUPPORT INC: $500 · Public Benefit
Health$187,260Other$60,910Human Services$2,100Environment$1,000Philanthropy$500Public Benefit$500

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 budgetBOULDER COMMUNITY HEALTH: $156,250 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetBOULDER CANCER FIGHTERS: $25,000 over 5y, 1.7% of budgetRise Against Suicide: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHERE WITH CARE: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE SENTENCING PROJECT: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWILD BEAR NATURE CENTER: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetRECOVERY CAFE LONGMONT: $510 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF LOUISVILLE INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO6.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Burns Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Burns Family 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 →median 0%
  • Wounded Warrior Project Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
2report 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 20 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 Burns Family’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