Skip to content
Colorado Business Development Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Colorado Business Development Foundation

Colorado Business Development Foundation develops and funds small business resources

$164k
Granted FY2019
8
Grants FY2019
1
States reached
$47k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2019.

Community Improvement$436k
02FY2019 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 8 grants below total $149,728, the rows itemized in this filing. The $163,993 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $14,265 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2019

  • Under $10k4 grants · $25k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $125k
$24,895
Median grant
1
States reached
$172k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PIKES PEAK SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER (EL PASO COUNTY)$46,610
BOULDER SBDC$27,440
AURORA-SOUTH METRO SBDC (CITY OF AURORA)$25,590
LINCOLN COUNTY EDC$24,895
RIO BLANCO COUNTY$9,266
PROWERS COUNTY ECONOMIC PROSPERITY$5,805
OTERO JUNIOR COLLEGE$5,122
NORTH METRO DENVER SBDC (FRONT RANGE COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION)$5,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–19) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 89% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%AURORA-SOUTH METRO SBDC (CITY OF AURORA): $26k → 8%PIKES PEAK SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER (EL PASO COUNTY): $47k → 9%EAST COLORADO SBDC (UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN COLORADO FOUNDATION): $5k → 9%RIO BLANCO COUNTY: $9k → 10%NORTH METRO DENVER SBDC (FRONT RANGE COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION): $8k → 10%GRAND JUNCTION SBDC & F-WORKS COWORKING (WESTERN COLORADO BDC): $17k → 11%BOULDER SBDC: $68k → 12%SOUTHERN COLORADO SBDC (PUEBLO COMMUNITY COLLEGE): $28k → 15%LINCOLN COUNTY EDC: $25k → 16%SAN LUIS VALLEY SBDC: $10k → 17%PROWERS COUNTY ECONOMIC PROSPERITY: $6k → 19%OTERO JUNIOR COLLEGE: $5k → 23%AURORA-SOUTH METRO SBDC (CITY OF AURORA): $10k → 8%PIKES PEAK SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER (EL PASO COUNTY): $25k → 9%RIO BLANCO COUNTY: $8k → 10%NORTH METRO DENVER SBDC (FRONT RANGE COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION): $5k → 10%BOULDER SBDC (BOULDER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE): $42k → 12%SOUTHERN COLORADO SBDC (PUEBLO COMMUNITY COLLEGE): $10k → 15%LINCOLN COUNTY EDC: $13k → 16%PROWERS ECONOMIC PROSPERITY: $5k → 19%AURORA-SOUTH METRO SBDC (CITY OF AURORA): $10k → 8%RIO BLANCO COUNTY: $8k → 10%BOULDER SBDC: $27k → 12%LINCOLN COUNTY EDC: $13k → 16%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.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$390k · 8 repeat orgs$46k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +14% since the first grant, against +2% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2019, 1 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
4

Total granted

$390k
$41k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+14%
+2%

Still filing today

38%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2019, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19
EducationCommunity ImprovementOther
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 CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
    3× · 2017–2019 · $137k · revenue -34%
  • EP
    El Paso County
    2× · 2018–2019 · $72k
  • LC
    LINCOLN COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
    3× · 2017–2019 · $50k · revenue +14%

Funded once

  • WC
    WESTERN COLORADO BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $17k · revenue +42%
  • AC
    ALAMOSA COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
  • VC
    Vail Centre
    one grant, 2018 · $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
Southern Colorado Economic Development District Inc

To assist member counties with economic development and assist with other loan programs.

Community Improvement
2
Colorado Chamber of Commerce Fka Co Assn of Commerce & Industry

The colorado chamber of commerce mission is to enhance the business climate of the state of colorado by promoting a positive legislative and regulatory environment and providing programs and services for its members, economic education,…

—
3
Boulder Sbdc Foundation co Jones & Associates Pc

Boulder Small Business Development Center (SBDC) is a hands-on, economic development and business assistance nonprofit whose mission is to support the growth and resiliency of small businesses in Boulder County by providing free business…

—
4
Otero County Economic Development Council
—
5
Longmont Economic Development Partnership

Providing information and services to existing and prospective businesses and industries.

—
6
Durango Chamber of Commerce

The Durango Chamber of Commerce is a membership based organization that promotes and supports the local business economy.

—
7
Fremont County Economic Development Corp

To promote and assist in economic development for Fremont County, CO.

—
8
Colorado Chamber Foundation

Perform research funded by grants from business and philanthropic foundations that support the colorado chamber foundations mission to improve the business environment in colorado.

Community Improvement
9
Aspen Entrepreneurs Corporation

The Organization supports entrepreneurs, local and small business and hosts events to build a #Givefirst entrepreneurial community in the Roaring Fork Valley, Colorado. This is accomplished through programming that involves mentorship,…

—
10
Rio Rancho Chamber of Commerce

A regional Chamber committed to improving the quality of community life driven by business leadership mentorship advocacy and prosperity.

—
11
Coronado Chamber of Commerce

Promoting our community, foster a strong local economy, provide networking & visibility opportunities, represent business interests to government, information source.

Community Improvement
12
Mesa County Business Education Foundation

Education for youth throughout mesa county, co

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of Northern Colorado Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Otero College Foundation. 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

8 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 13 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BOULDER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $137,040 · OtherBOULDER CHAMBER OF COMMERCEEl Paso County: $71,610 · OtherEl Paso CountyCITY OF AURORA: $45,590 · OtherCITY OF AURORACOMMUNITY COLLEGE OF AURORA: $37,860 · OtherCOMMUNITY COLLEGE OF AURORARIO BLANCO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE: $24,266 · OtherRIO BLANCO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE+3 more: $29,495 · Other+3 moreLINCOLN COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $49,895 · Community ImprovementLINCOLN COUNTY EC…WESTERN COLORADO BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $17,417 · Community ImprovementWESTERN COLORADO …FRONT RANGE COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $12,500 · EducationOtero College Foundation: $5,122 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN COLORADO FOUNDATION: $5,000 · Education
Other$345,861Community Improvement$67,312Education$22,622

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 budgetBOULDER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $137,040 over 3y, 2.3% of budgetWESTERN COLORADO BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $17,417 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetFRONT RANGE COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $12,500 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetALAMOSA COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: $10,000 over 1y, 4.9% of budgetVail Centre: $8,690 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN COLORADO FOUNDATION: $5,000 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Mile High United Way …
Mile High United Way IncCO12.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Mile High United Way 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 Colorado Business Development Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Colorado Business Development 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%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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 Colorado Business Development Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Colorado Business Development 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.

    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 13 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2022) is on record and reports $18k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2019, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Colorado Business Development’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