· Public charity
Colorado West Healthcare System
The mission of Colorado West Healthcare System and community hospital is to improve the health and quality of life of the individuals and communities we serve.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2020.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 6 grants below total $234,806 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $306,081 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $71,275 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2020
- Under $10k1 grant · $8k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $56k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $172k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Quality Health Network | $171,606 |
| CMU Foundation | $20,700 |
| Grand Junction Soccer Club | $15,000 |
| Redlands Middle School | $10,000 |
| Strive | $10,000 |
| Western Slope Center for Children | $7,500 |
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, $20k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 +30% since the first grant, against +22% for the ones you funded once.
8 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2020, 2 since wound down.
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 FY2020, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- QHQUALITY HEALTH NETWORK2× · 2019–2020 · $292k · revenue +4%
- CMCOLORADO MESA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION3× · 2018–2020 · $70k · revenue +76%
- GJGRAND JUNCTION SOCCER CLUB3× · 2018–2020 · $45k · revenue +308%
Funded once
- GJGRAND JUNCTION ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIPgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +118%
- EMEUREKA MCCONNELL SCIENCE MUSEUMone grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +22%
- CFCitizens for School District 51one grant, 2019 · $10k
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 equip partners and communities in colorado and across the nation with the resources, services and unbiased data needed to improve health and health care. we help communities, organizations and individuals identify opportunities to…
Educate the general public about important policy issues.
To increase access to high quality health care for people in need in colorado.
Prime health advances health justice, equity, access quality and cost through innovation, collaboration, and community building.
Education for youth throughout mesa county, co
To provide innovative career exploration and work-based learning opportunities that prepare youth to enter tomorrow's workforce and build fulfilling lives.
To provide the overall health of people in 13 counties of western colorado by developing and implementing pipeline activities to help health care providers for the future; improve the quality of and accessibility of education of health…
The Grand Foundation is a philanthropic organization serving all of Grand County, Colorado. The Foundation seeks to improve the quality of life in Grand County by proactively addressing current and future needs in the areas of Health &…
Colorado Thrives exists to support Coloradans to achieve economic mobility through access to good jobs.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mesa Developmental Services and the most unlike its peers is Quality Health Network. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
11 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. 11 of the 13 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 QUALITY HEALTH NETWORK ↗
- Who funds COLORADO MESA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GRAND JUNCTION SOCCER CLUB ↗
- Who funds Western Slope Center For Children ↗
- Who funds Community Hospital Foundation ↗
- Who funds MESA DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES ↗
- Who funds HILLTOP HEALTH SERVICES CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds GRAND JUNCTION ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP ↗
- Who funds EUREKA MCCONNELL SCIENCE MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds DISTRICT 51 FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ST BALDRICK'S FOUNDATION INC ↗
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: International Association of Lions 3602 · Western Colorado Community Foundation Inc · St Mary's Hospital & Medical Center Inc · Rocky Mountain Health Foundation · The Colorado Health Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · United Way of Mesa County Inc · Bacon Family Foundation · Mile High United Way Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation 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 Colorado West Healthcare System 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.