Loading…
· Public charity
COLORADO AUTO THEFT INVESTIGATORS
The COLORADO AUTO THEFT INVESTIGATORS association (cata) is dedicated to the prevention and investigation of motor vehicle thefts and related crimes in colorado and the rocky mountain region and does so by investigative training and promotiing interagency communication
$213k
Granted FY2024
15
Grants
1
Communities
$67k
Largest
01What you fund
01
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 100% of COLORADO AUTO THEFT INVESTIGATORS’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.
02FY2024 · 15 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k10 grants · $64k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $66k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $67k
$6,928
Median grant
1
States reached
$46k
Total assets
Largest grants
- COLO STATE PATROL$66,635
- LAKEWOOD PD$22,985
- WESTMINSTER PD$18,212
- THORNTON PD$13,086
- JEFFERSON COUNTY SO$11,438
- BOULDER PD$9,232
- COLO SPRINGS PD$7,326
- WHEATRIDGE PD$6,928
- BROOMFIELD PD$6,167
- GOLDEN PD$6,137
- ARAPAHOE COUNTY SO$6,090
- ENGLEWOOD PD$5,846
- DOUGLAS COUNTY SO$5,634
- AURORA PD$5,144
- MESA CNTY SO$5,101
02The need
03
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.
show:
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY22–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 8% — the area typically sits at 7%. 38% of your dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
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; 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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
03Your edge
repeat funding
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.
80%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$256k · 6 repeat orgs$65k to everyone else
6 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
6
9
Total granted
$256k
$65k
Still filing today
0%
0%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 67% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $65k went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
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
- CSColorado State Patrol4× · 2021–2024 · $105k
- LPLakewood PD4× · 2021–2024 · $38k
- WPWestminster PD3× · 2022–2024 · $33k
Funded once
- TPTHORNTON PDone grant, 2024 · $13k
- BPBOULDER PDone grant, 2024 · $9k
- CSCOLO SPRINGS PDone grant, 2024 · $7k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
04Your field
04the grantee network
0 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2021–2024.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
0/0
Grantees still filing
0/0
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Other$321,491
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.
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.
Colorado Gives FoundationCO14.4× affinity5 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: Colorado Gives Foundation · National Recreation and Park Association · The Denver Foundation · Mile High United Way 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.
05Through Plinth
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to Colorado Auto Theft Investigators?
Find your warmest path to Colorado Auto Theft Investigators through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines