· Private foundation
Colorado Wildlife Habitat Preservation 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 FY2019–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Colorado Fourteeners Initiative | $5,000 |
| Crested Butte Land Trust | $2,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,800 |
| Western Aspen Alliance | $1,500 |
| Rocky Mountain Cat Conservancy | $1,000 |
| Colorado Open Lands | $1,000 |
| Roaring Fork Outdoor Volunteer | $1,000 |
| Rocky Mountain Conservancy | $800 |
| Wilderness Workshop | $500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $500 |
| Colorado Parks and Wildlife | $350 |
| 1 for Open Space | $300 |
| Colorado Wildlife Federation | $300 |
| Water Education Colorado | $250 |
| Friends of Front Range Wildlife | $200 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 58% of your 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.
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 +34% since the first grant, against -32% for the ones you funded once.
23 repeat relationships — 20 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 3 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, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k 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
- CFCOLORADO FOURTEENERS INITIATIVE4× · 2022–2025 · $20k · revenue +3%
- CBCRESTED BUTTE LAND TRUST3× · 2023–2025 · $3k · revenue +24%
- RMROCKY MOUNTAIN CONSERVANCY7× · 2019–2025 · $3k · revenue +122%
Funded once
- CWCOLORADO WILDLIFE HERITAGE FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2019 · $300 · revenue -32%
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.
Works with farmers and ranchers to address water issues around the state impacting agriculture.
The mission of cacd is to serve as the unified voice for the conservation districts of colorado.
The Friends of Mount Evans & Lost Creek Wilderness (FOMELC) is a 501(c)3 charitable organization founded in November 2005. FOMELC is a 100% volunteer non-profit organization. We offer volunteer opportunities for all ages, physical…
Rocky Mountain Field Institute conserves and protects public lands in Southern Colorado through volunteer-based trail and restoration projects, environmental education, and restoration research.
Living rivers promotes river restoration through mobilization by articulating conservation and alternative management strategies to the public. seeking to revive the natural habitat and spirit of rivers by undoing the extensive damage done…
To unite, elevate and empower colorado's conservation community to protect the lands and waters that define our state.
To promote science-based wildlife management that fosters ecosystem health and dynamic equilibrium between species throughout the state of wyoming.
Protecting the open land and special places of the roaring fork and middle colorado river valleys for wildlife, agriculture, and community forever.
To restore water to colorado's rivers.
Clrt works in partnership with landowners to conserve and protect land and water resources.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rocky Mountain Wild and the most unlike its peers is Gunnison Trails Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
15 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. 15 of the 27 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 COLORADO FOURTEENERS INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds CRESTED BUTTE LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds ROCKY MOUNTAIN CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds Roaring Fork Outdoor Volunteers ↗
- Who funds COLORADO WILDLIFE FEDERATION INC ↗
- Who funds COLORADO OPEN LANDS ↗
- Who funds WILDERNESS WORKSHOP ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE FRONT RANGE WILDLIFE REFUGES ↗
- Who funds ROARING FORK CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds COLO FOUNDATION FOR WATER EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds 1 PERCENT FOR OPEN SPACE INC ↗
- Who funds ROCKY MOUNTAIN WILD ↗
- Who funds COLORADO WILDLIFE HERITAGE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ASPEN GLOBAL CHANGE INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds Gunnison Trails 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: Colorado Gives Foundation · National Forest Foundation · Rose Community Foundation · Patagoniaorg · The Denver Foundation · Aspen Skiing Company Environment Foundation · Aspen Community Foundation · The Pew Charitable Trusts · The Colorado Health Foundation · Ibm International Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust
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 Wildlife Habitat Preservation 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 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.