Skip to content
Colorado State University Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Colorado State University Foundation

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).

$79M
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$79M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
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 2025.

Education$655MEnvironment$290kAnimals$20k
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$79,217,346
Median grant
1
States reached
$865M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY$79,217,346
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 (FY21–23, $20k) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%CANFIELD CONSORTIUM: $10k → 21%HISPANIC ACCESS FOUNDATION: $10k → 14%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.

Which US states its grants reach

MI
NY
MA
OR
OH
CA
CO
VA
MD
AZ
NM
DC
MS
TX
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 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
Big Thompson Watershed Coalition

Vision: a healthy and resilient big thompson watershed benefitting fish, wildlife, and the people itserves through collaborative efforts for current and future generations. mission: working with others to take action that protects and…

Environment
2
West Creek Conservancy

Our mission is to enrich the lives of all people in northeast ohio by conserving natural habitats, restoring the ecological value of our region's lands and waters, and expanding opportunities to connect people from all cultures to…

Environment
3
Nature Collective

Nature collective's mission is to drive a passion for nature for all. we think inclusively and diversely when serving those devoid of nature those who remember nature and want to connect back to it and those who have an affinity with…

Environment
4
California Wildlife Foundation

The foundation works with diverse groups representing many interests to acquire and restore critical wildlife habitat and protecting species

Animals
5
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
6
Climate Conservation Dba Center for Large Landscape Conservation

We bring science, policy, and proven solutions directly to communities working to restore the integrity and natural connectivity of the landscapes in which they live. (see schedule o)

Environment
7
Coastal Bend Bays & Estuaries Program Inc

Coastal bend bays & estuaries program is dedicated to protecting and restoring bays and estuaries of the texas coastal bend. coastal bend bays and estuaries remain a vital part of the environmental and economic landscape by preserving and…

Environment
8
Huron Pines Resource Conservation & Development Council Inc

It is our mission at huron pines to conserve and enhance northern michigan's natural resources to ensure healthy water, protected places and vibrant communities. for alomst 50 years, our work across the forests, lakes and streams of…

Environment
9
Resource Renewal Institute

The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.

Environment
10
Natura Bolivia Foundation

The Natura Bolivia Foundation is dedicated to implementing, and evaluating the impact of conservation and development programs, with a focus on watershed conservation, protected areas, and incentive based conservation in Bolivia. We work…

International
11
Natural Resources Defense Council Inc

We safeguard the earth: its people, its plants and animals, and (see schedule o) the natural systems on which all life depends. we work to restore the integrity of the elements that sustain life - air, land, and water - to defend…

Environment
12
Amazon Conservation Team

The amazon conservation team (act) partners with indigenous and other local communities to protect tropical forests and strengthen traditional culture.

Science & Tech
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Greenroots Inc; the most unlike its peers is Canfield Consortium. 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

19 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. 19 of the 23 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/19
Grantees still filing
14/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY: $654,940,132 · OtherCOLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY+4 more: $40,000 · OtherBORDERLANDS RESTORATION NETWORK: $100,000 · EnvironmentTurner Station Conservation Teams Inc: $10,000 · EnvironmentWESTERN RESERVE LAND CONSERVANCY: $10,000 · EnvironmentAmerican Forests: $10,000 · EnvironmentTHE COLORADO RIO GRANDE RESTORATION FOUNDATION: $10,000 · EnvironmentTREES WATER AND PEOPLE: $10,000 · EnvironmentEDUCATION ECONOMICS ENVIRONMENTAL CLIMATE AND HEAL: $10,000 · EnvironmentCOUNCIL FOR WATERSHED HEALTH: $10,000 · EnvironmentCHAMA PEAK LAND ALLIANCE: $10,000 · EnvironmentFRUITFUL COMMONS: $10,000 · EnvironmentGREENROOTS INC: $10,000 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF VALLE DE ORO NWR: $10,000 · EnvironmentHispanic Access Foundation: $10,000 · Human ServicesCANFIELD CONSORTIUM: $10,000 · Human ServicesNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $10,000 · AnimalsThe Blueprint Foundation: $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentEcoWorks: $10,000 · Housing & ShelterLINK HOUSTON: $10,000 · Public Benefit
Other$654,980,132Environment$210,000Human Services$20,000Animals$10,000Youth Development$10,000Housing & Shelter$10,000Public Benefit$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBORDERLANDS RESTORATION NETWORK: $100,000 over 2y, 3.0% of budgetWESTERN RESERVE LAND CONSERVANCY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAmerican Forests: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE COLORADO RIO GRANDE RESTORATION FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetTREES WATER AND PEOPLE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Blueprint Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetBAT CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHispanic Access Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCOUNCIL FOR WATERSHED HEALTH: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCHAMA PEAK LAND ALLIANCE: $10,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetFRUITFUL COMMONS: $10,000 over 1y, 10.0% of budgetGREENROOTS INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCANFIELD CONSORTIUM: $10,000 over 1y, 7.4% of budgetFRIENDS OF VALLE DE ORO NWR: $10,000 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetEcoWorks: $10,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetLINK HOUSTON: $10,000 over 1y, 0.6% 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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

National Fish and Wil…The Nature ConservancyVanguard Charitable E…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
National Fish and Wildlife FoundationDC16.5× affinity6 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · The Nature Conservancy · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 State University Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Colorado State University Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 10%
  • The Blueprint Foundation: 10% of income from government
  • Greenroots Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
1report 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.

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 23 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Colorado State University’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