· Private foundation
Colgan 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k9 grants · $31k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $150k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $248k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ONETEAM CF | $100,000 |
| FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY | $83,410 |
| Friends of Massey University | $64,275 |
| JW HALLAHAN ASSOCIATION | $35,000 |
| Columbus University Rowing | $34,000 |
| Passing the Torch Paraalymic | $25,000 |
| Veper Boat Club | $20,000 |
| Elite Rowing Inc | $13,335 |
| SS WINTER SPORTS CLUB | $12,500 |
| The A0gustians of Villanove | $10,000 |
| Boston Universsity Rowing Team | $6,000 |
| HARVARD UNIVERSITY | $6,000 |
| Syacuse University | $6,000 |
| YESHIVA UNIVERSITY ATHLETIC ASSOC | $5,000 |
| Various Scholarship small | $3,446 |
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 (FY19–20, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 65% 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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 +60% since the first grant, against +55% for the ones you funded once.
34 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2025, 26 since wound down; 10 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, 61% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $165k 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
- OCONETEAM CF9× · 2017–2025 · $1.1M · revenue +38% · 86% of their budget
- SSSTEAMBOAT SPRINGS WINTER SPORTS CLUB INC3× · 2017–2021 · $24k · revenue +91%
- TLTHE LOWELL WHITEMAN SCHOOL5× · 2021–2025 · $5k · revenue +67%
Funded once
- TOTrustees of University of Paone grant, 2022 · $308k
- STShield T3 LLCone grant, 2021 · $127k
- RNROW NEW YORK INCone grant, 2020 · $100k · revenue -40%
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.
To steward, strengthen, and grow american rowing by championing performance and igniting new passion for the sport. (see schedule o).
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
Bates is a college of the liberal arts and sciences, and is a coeducational, nonsectarian, residential college with special commitments to academic rigor, and to assuring in all of its efforts the dignity of each individual, and access to…
Since 1775, the mission of Hampden-Sydney College has been to form good men and good citizens in an atmosphere of sound learning.
The organization seeks to organize, manage and promote the sport of intercollegiate rowing, and to annually hold postseason intercollegiate national rowing championships that support the highest level of competition amoung top…
Provide a competitive rowing program for high school students and provide recreational rowing training for members of the community.
To advance and promote amateur rowing through national and international amateur sports competition.
The mission of riverside boat club is to provide facilities, equipment and coaches to encourage rowing skills at the highest competitive levels and to promote a friendly and social spirit among it's community of rowers.
The association is dedicated to providing fair, safe and competitive rowing experiences to high school teams and their members and to serve as an advocate for junior and scholastic rowing.
To develop and promote the sport of rowing in alignment with the educational philosophy of Hingham High School. The goal is to create a positive culture for both student-athletes and parents to enjoy the sport of rowing.
Wheaton college provides a transformative liberal arts education, combining theory and practice, for intellectually curious students within a collaborative and vibrant extended community and network that values and strives to create an…
The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Row New York Inc and the most unlike its peers is Hopewell Fire Department. 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 36 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
23 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. 23 of the 103 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 ONETEAM CF ↗
- Who funds ROW NEW YORK INC ↗
- Who funds VESPER BOAT CLUB ↗
- Who funds Friends of Massey University ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗
- Who funds STEAMBOAT SPRINGS WINTER SPORTS CLUB INC ↗
- Who funds Penn Athletic Club Rowing Association ↗
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: Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Charities Aid Foundation America · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc
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 Colgan 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
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.