Skip to content

· Private foundation

Butterfield Foundation Inc

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.

$60k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$40k
Largest
01What it funds
0182% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$79kEducation$48kHuman Services$37kCrime & Legal$36kHealth$16kFood & Nutrition$14kPublic Safety & Disaster$10kArts & Culture$10kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $8k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $53k
$12,500
Median grant
3
States reached
$653k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$40,000
CASA MONROE$12,500
ART FOR THE SOUL$5,000
ACADEMY CHRISTIAN CHURCH$2,950
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 (FY19–25, $44k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 52% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 10%CASA MONROE: $13k → 15%CASA MONROE: $10k → 15%MERCY'S GATE: $3k → 9%MERCY'S GATE: $2k → 9%MERCY'S GATE: $500 → 9%TESSA: $1k → 9%TESSA: $500 → 9%TESSA: $500 → 9%TRI-LAKES CARES: $5k → 9%TRI-LAKES CARES: $5k → 9%TRI-LAKES CARES: $4k → 9%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 9% of Butterfield Foundation Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 85% of the giving stays in CO; by stated purpose, 77%.

Butterfield Foundation Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$311k · 15 repeat orgs$53k to everyone else

15 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
19

Total granted

$311k
$53k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+45%
+114%

Still filing today

60%
21%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesReligionHousing & ShelterFood & NutritionHealthPublic Safety & DisasterOther
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

  • CM
    Crossfire Ministries Inc
    4× · 2019–2022 · $15k · revenue +102%
  • TC
    TRI-LAKES CARES
    3× · 2020–2022 · $14k · revenue +138%
  • Care and Share Inc
    3× · 2017–2020 · $13k · revenue +45%

Funded once

  • CA
    CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER FOR THE PIKES PEAK REGION INC
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue -35%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $5k
  • HM
    HUGH MARTIN MEMORIAL FUND
    one grant, 2022 · $5k
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
El Paso Area Christian Counseling Service

Counseling Services offering hope, healing, and restoration to hurting people, marriages, and families using respected therapy practices and solid biblical principles.

Human Services
2
Tu Casa Incorporated

To support healthy violence-free lives and relationships for all children and adults in the San Luis Valley by providing crisis intervention services advocacy and counseling for victims and survivors of domestic and sexual violence.

—
3
Pueblo Rescue Mission

Because of our love for God, we extend his mercy as we strive to empower and improve the lives of unsheltered adults in Pueblo, CO, through provisions of food, shelter and navigational support services.

—
4
Clear Creek County Advocates

Assistance is provided to victims of assault, battered victims, and victims of other forms of physical, sexual and mental abuse. Advocacy, education and direct 24 hour crisis intervention and services are provided in the Clear Creek County…

Human Services
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
Child Crisis Center of El Paso Inc

The mission of the Child Crisis Center is to protect children, newborn through fifteen years of age, from abuse/neglect by providing temporary short-term emergency shelter and family support services.

Human Services
7
Pueblo Rape Crisis Services Inc

Juniper SoCO provides comprehensive healing resources to survivors of sexual assault / intimate partner violence, equipping the community to prevent future sexual violence, & fostering an organizational culture that prioritizes wellness…

Health
8
Casa of Williamson County Texas

CASA of Williamson County, TX exists to empower community volunteers to advocate for children who have experienced abuse or neglect to find loving, safe, and permanent homes.

Crime & Legal
9
Called to Peace Ministries Inc

Called To Peace Ministries exists to provide a compassionate, comprehensive, and Christ-centered response to those impacted by domestic abuse.

Religion
10
Family Promise - Salt Lake

We help families experiencing homelessness find lasting independence and security.

Housing & Shelter
11
Crossroads Christian Counseling

Crossroads combines innovative clinical counseling with a redemptive worldview to restore people to emotional health, relational unity, and a hopeful future.

Human Services
12
Crisis Center for South Suburbia

The Crisis Center for South Suburbia is a non-profit community organization providing emergency shelter and essential services for individuals and families victimized by domestic violence while addressing the societal issues contributing…

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Children's Advocacy Center for the Pikes Peak Region Inc; the most unlike its peers is Bangladesh Christian Mission. 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

14 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. 14 of the 35 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
9/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $90,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientACADEMY CHRISTIAN CHURCH: $67,950 · OtherACADEMY CHRISTIAN CHURCHACADEMY CHRISTIAN: $47,980 · OtherACADEMY CHRISTIANADF: $12,000 · OtherART FOR THE SOUL: $10,000 · Other+19 more: $44,650 · Other+19 moreCASA MONROE INC: $22,500 · Human ServicesCASA MONROE I…TRI-LAKES CARES: $14,000 · Human ServicesTRI-LAKES CAR…Mercy's Gate: $5,000 · Human ServicesMercy's GateTESSA: $2,000 · Human ServicesCrossfire Ministries Inc: $14,500 · ReligionStableStrides: $2,000 · ReligionBANGLADESH CHRISTIAN MISSION: $1,500 · ReligionCare and Share Inc: $13,000 · Food & NutritionCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER FOR THE PIKES PEAK REGION INC: $10,000 · Crime & LegalCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION BOULDER COUNTY: $10,000 · PhilanthropyLife Network: $7,000 · Health
Other$272,580Human Services$43,500Religion$18,000Food & Nutrition$13,000Crime & Legal$10,000Philanthropy$10,000Health$7,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCASA MONROE INC: $22,500 over 2y, 3.0% of budgetCrossfire Ministries Inc: $14,500 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetTRI-LAKES CARES: $14,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetCare and Share Inc: $13,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER FOR THE PIKES PEAK REGION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION BOULDER COUNTY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLife Network: $7,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetMercy's Gate: $5,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL POLICING INSTITUTE: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSARAH'S HOME CORPORATION: $3,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTESSA: $2,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetStableStrides: $2,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetBANGLADESH CHRISTIAN MISSION: $1,500 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetEL PASO COUNTY SEARCH AND RESCUE INC: $250 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.

  • Who funds CASA MONROE INC ↗
  • Who funds Crossfire Ministries Inc ↗
  • Who funds TRI-LAKES CARES ↗
  • Who funds Care and Share Inc ↗
  • Who funds CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER FOR THE PIKES PEAK REGION INC ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY FOUNDATION BOULDER COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds Life Network ↗
  • Who funds Mercy's Gate ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL POLICING INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds SARAH'S HOME CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds TESSA ↗
  • Who funds StableStrides ↗
  • Who funds BANGLADESH CHRISTIAN MISSION ↗
  • Who funds EL PASO COUNTY SEARCH AND RESCUE INC ↗

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.

El Pomar FoundationCO21.4× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: El Pomar Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · Pikes Peak Community Foundation · Colorado Springs Health Foundation · The Joseph Henry Edmondson Foundation · The Marson Foundation · The Hester E & Edwin W Giddings Foundation · The Myron Stratton Home · Pikes Peak United Way · Christian Community Foundation Inc · Gazette Charities · The Nutrition Camp School Foundaton Inc

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 Butterfield Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Butterfield Foundation Inc. 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%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Butterfield Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Butterfield Foundation Inc 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.

    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 35 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 Butterfield’s filings →

    More from the funding graph