· Private foundation
Clarence V Laguardia Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k2 grants · $10k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $145k
- $50k–250k5 grants · $290k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH | $75,000 |
| METROPOLITAN STATE UNIVERSITY OF DENVER | $60,000 |
| COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES FOUNDATION | $55,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION | $50,000 |
| DENVER ART MUSEUM | $50,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF DENVER | $40,000 |
| JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES OF COLORADO | $30,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN COLORADO | $25,000 |
| SHALOM PARK | $20,000 |
| JEFFERSON COUNTY LIBRARY FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| CREEDE REPERTORY THEATRE | $10,000 |
| NORTH HIGH SCHOOL SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| FAMILY STAR INC | $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 (FY18–25, $422k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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 +34% since the first grant, against +11% for the ones you funded once.
28 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
- DADENVER ART MUSEUM7× · 2018–2025 · $362k · revenue +18%
- JFJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF COLORADO INC6× · 2018–2025 · $282k · revenue +92%
- UOUNIVERSITY OF DENVER7× · 2018–2025 · $280k · revenue +34%
Funded once
- CHCHILDRENS HOSPITALone grant, 2022 · $35k
- MSMETROPOLITAN STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATIONone grant, 2021 · $35k
ST MARYS UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTAone grant, 2018 · $20k · revenue -6%
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.
See schedule o colorado state university foundation assists in the promotion, development, and enhancement of facilities and educational programs and enhancements of faculty, students, and alumni of colorado state university (csu). this is…
Roseman university of health sciences advances the health and wellness of the communities we serve by educating current and future generations of health professionals, conducting research and providing patient care. we actively pursue…
The university's goal in the coming decade is to advance learning through the integration of teaching, research and service to others. the core of this goal is to prepare graduates to engage with the world and lead lives of meaning. to do…
Rooted in the liberal arts & sciences & lutheran expression of the christian faith, & is committed to offering a challenging education that develops qualities of mind, spirit, & body necessary for a rewarding life of leadership & service…
The organization's mission is to educate students for creative occupations in diverse fields of arts and media.
The university of rio grande/ rio grande community college is america's unique private/public institution of higher education designed to provide learners the opportunity to attain a high-quality, high-value education. our personalized,…
Scu is a catholic and jesuit institution that makes student learning its central focus, promotes faculty and staff learning in its various forms, and exhibits organizational learning.
The university of montana foundation inspires philanthropic support to enhance excellence and opportunity at the university of montana.
Serving god by providing christ-centered higher education.
Columbia college improves lives by providing quality education to both traditional and nontraditional students, helping them achieve their true potential.
The rockefeller university (the university) is a world renowned center for research and graduate education in the biomedical sciences, chemistry, bioinformatics, and physics. the university's 73 laboratories conduct both clinical and basic…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of Colorado Foundation and the most unlike its peers is St Marys University of Minnesota. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
19 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. 19 of the 39 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 NATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH ↗
- Who funds DENVER ART MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF COLORADO INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF DENVER ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Children's Hospital Colorado Foundation ↗
- Who funds COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SHALOM PARK ↗
- Who funds CREEDE REPERTORY THEATRE ↗
- Who funds REGIS UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds FAMILY STAR INC ↗
- Who funds JEFFERSON COUNTY LIBRARY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Rocky Mountain Microfinance ↗
- Who funds JOSHUA INC ↗
- Who funds ROSE ANDOM CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds ST MARYS UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA ↗
- Who funds ARAPAHOE COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ROUNDUP RIVER RANCH ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL DOWN SYNDROME 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: Colorado Gives Foundation · Rose Community Foundation · Temple Hoyne Buell Foundation · Daniels Fund · The Denver Foundation · Xcel Energy Foundation · The Anschutz Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Clarence V Laguardia 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 Clarence V Laguardia Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Clarence V Laguardia 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.