Skip to content

· Public charity

Community Office for Resource Efficiency

Core has been helping the roaring fork valley save energy and cut carbon emissions since 1994.

$457k
Granted FY2024still arriving
10
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$50k
Largest
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 2024.

Environment$1.8MCommunity Improvement$956kHousing & Shelter$704kPublic Benefit$641kEducation$333kRecreation & Sports$226kArts & Culture$155kFood & Nutrition$135kOther$0
02FY2024 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 10 grants below total $304,432, the rows itemized in this filing. The $456,896 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $152,464 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 · FY2024

  • $10k–50k8 grants · $204k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $100k
$25,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$5.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE$50,000
THE FARM COLLABORATIVE$50,000
ASPEN SKIING COMPANY$40,000
TOWN OF BASALT$32,000
STOTTS MILL$25,000
ASPEN CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES$25,000
ASPEN MOUNTAIN RESIDENCES$25,000
MISS STEPHANIES HOUSE LLC$22,500
COTTLE CARR AND YAW ARCHITECTS$20,000
AJAX MOUNTAIN ASSOCIATES$14,932
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 (FY17–22, $34k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%CARBONDALE COMMUNITY NONPROFIT CENTER: $10k → 6%WE-CYCLE: $10k → 6%THE EARLY LEARNING CENTER INC: $5k → 6%WE-CYCLE: $9k → 6%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.

72%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.6M · 36 repeat orgs$1.4M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +73% since the first grant, against +48% for those funded once.

36 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2024, 31 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

36
70

Total granted

$3.6M
$1.3M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+73%
+48%

Still filing today

19%
26%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 65% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $107k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EducationEnvironmentHuman ServicesArts & CulturePublic BenefitHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • CR
    CENTRAL ROCKY MOUNTAIN PERMACULTURE INST
    5× · 2019–2023 · $373k · revenue +73% · 65% of their budget
  • HF
    HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ROARING FORK
    2× · 2019–2020 · $157k · revenue +28%
  • TF
    The Farm Collaborative
    2× · 2020–2024 · $75k · revenue +83%

Funded once

  • SB
    ST BENEDICT'S MONASTERY
    one grant, 2018 · $78k
  • CM
    COLORADO MOUNTAIN COLLEGE
    one grant, 2017 · $75k
  • AP
    ASPEN PITKIN EMPLOYEE HOUSING INC
    one grant, 2021 · $60k · revenue -41%
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
Wild Rockies Field Institute Inc

To broaden the nature of a liberal arts education; teach critical thinking about social & environmental issues; foster understanding of & respect for natural & human communities; & cultivate a sense of place that encourages personal,…

Education
2
Aspen Valley Land Trust

Protecting the open land and special places of the roaring fork and middle colorado river valleys for wildlife, agriculture, and community forever.

Environment
3
Arapahoe County Early Childhood Council Inc

Services provided in arapahoe county colorado related to early childhood education intervention issues.

Education
4
High Rockies Community School

Our mission is to provide individualized educational options where students and teachers engage in playful, exploratory learning by creating a culture of collaboration in a safe, diverse, multi-age environment. Our students are encouraged…

Education
5
Colorado Rural Electric Association

To enhance and advance the interests of its member electric cooperatives through a united effort.

—
6
Rogue Climate

Rogue Climate's mission is to empower Southern Oregon communities most impacted by climate change including low-income, rural, youth, seniors & communities of color, to win climate justice by organizing for clean energy, sustainable jobs &…

Education
7
Cowiche Canyon Conservancy

Protecting our shrub-steppe and connecting people to this vanishing landscape.

—
8
Taproot Earth

Taproot Earth works with communities to support strategies around the use of water, energy and land.

Environment
9
Housing Resources of Western Colorado

To provide affordable housing and to promote the wise and sustainable use of the earth's resources.

—
10
Rocky Mountain Wild

Rocky mountain wild works to protect, connect, and restore wildlife and wild lands in the southern rocky mountain region. we work to secure the biodiversity of the mountains, plains, and desert ecosystems of colorado, wyoming, utah, and…

Environment
11
Redwood Cooperative School

Education Preschool Through Eight Grade

Education
12
Boulder Watershed Collective

The Boulder Watershed Collective is a 501c3 non-profit stakeholder-driven organization established to address forested watershed health,resiliency and stewardship. We have three program areas: ClimateAdaptation and Resilience Watershed…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Anderson Ranch Arts Center; the most unlike its peers is Energetics Education dba Solar Rollers. 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

25 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

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 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 25 of the 111 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
25/25
Grantees still filing
21/25
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CITY OF ASPEN: $633,983 · OtherCITY OF ASPENPITKIN COUNTY: $271,721 · OtherPITKIN COUNTYCITY OF ASPEN: $250,000 · OtherCITY OF ASPENTOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE: $200,739 · OtherSUNSENSE INC: $198,400 · OtherTOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE: $182,500 · OtherHABITAT FOR HUMANITY ROARING FORK: $157,400 · OtherASPEN SKIING COMPANY: $147,026 · Other+83 more: $2,091,183 · Other+83 moreCENTRAL ROCKY MOUNTAIN PERMACULTURE INST: $372,946 · EnvironmentCENTRAL RO…ROARING FORK CONSERVANCY: $50,000 · EnvironmentROARING FO…ASPEN CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES: $35,000 · EnvironmentASPEN CENT…+2 more: $25,776 · EnvironmentThe Farm Collaborative: $75,000 · EducationMARK ROSS MONTESSORI FOUNDATION: $50,000 · EducationCOLORADO ROCKY MOUNTAIN SCHOOL INC: $37,500 · EducationTwo Rivers Community School: $20,000 · EducationASPEN WALDORF FOUNDATION INC: $20,000 · EducationENERGETICS EDUCATION dba Solar Rollers: $20,000 · EducationCHILDREN'S ROCKY MOUNTAIN SCHOOL: $10,000 · EducationTHE ARTS CAMPUS AT WILLITS: $60,000 · Arts & CultureANDERSON RANCH ARTS CENTER: $20,000 · Arts & CultureWE-CYCLE: $19,117 · Human ServicesCARBONDALE COMMUNITY NONPROFIT CENTER: $10,000 · Human ServicesTHE EARLY LEARNING CENTER: $5,000 · Human ServicesENERGY OUTREACH COLORADO: $15,859 · Recreation & SportsGARFIELD COUNTY SENIOR HOUSING CORPORATION: $10,000 · Housing & ShelterCLEAN ENERGY ECONOMY FOR THE REGION: $9,050 · Public Benefit
Other$4,132,952Environment$483,722Education$232,500Arts & Culture$80,000Human Services$34,117Recreation & Sports$15,859Housing & Shelter$10,000Public Benefit$9,050

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 budgetCENTRAL ROCKY MOUNTAIN PERMACULTURE INST: $372,946 over 5y, 65% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY ROARING FORK: $157,400 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetThe Farm Collaborative: $75,000 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetASPEN PITKIN EMPLOYEE HOUSING INC: $60,000 over 1y, 5.4% of budgetTHE ARTS CAMPUS AT WILLITS: $60,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetROARING FORK CONSERVANCY: $50,000 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetCOLORADO ROCKY MOUNTAIN SCHOOL INC: $37,500 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetHoly Cross Electric Association Inc: $35,405 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetASPEN CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES: $35,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetANDERSON RANCH ARTS CENTER: $20,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetASPEN HISTORICAL SOCIETY: $20,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetASPEN WALDORF FOUNDATION INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetENERGETICS EDUCATION dba Solar Rollers: $20,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetWE-CYCLE: $19,117 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetENERGY OUTREACH COLORADO: $15,859 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGRID ALTERNATIVES: $15,776 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCHILDREN'S ROCKY MOUNTAIN SCHOOL: $10,000 over 1y, 7.5% of budgetCARBONDALE COMMUNITY NONPROFIT CENTER: $10,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetSUSTAINABLE SETTINGS: $10,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetCLEAN ENERGY ECONOMY FOR THE REGION: $9,050 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetCARBONDALE ARTS: $8,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetTHE EARLY LEARNING CENTER: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% 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.

  • Who funds CENTRAL ROCKY MOUNTAIN PERMACULTURE INST ↗
  • Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ROARING FORK ↗
  • Who funds The Farm Collaborative ↗
  • Who funds ASPEN PITKIN EMPLOYEE HOUSING INC ↗
  • Who funds THE ARTS CAMPUS AT WILLITS ↗
  • Who funds ROARING FORK CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds MARK ROSS MONTESSORI FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds COLORADO ROCKY MOUNTAIN SCHOOL INC ↗
  • Who funds Holy Cross Electric Association Inc ↗
  • Who funds ASPEN CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES ↗

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.

Aspen Community FoundationCO43.4× affinity20 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Aspen Community Foundation · The Thrift Shop · Aspen Business Center Foundation · Aspen Skiing Company Environment Foundation · Brady Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · Western Colorado Community Foundation Inc · Our Part co Marsha Soffer · Nm Morris Family Foundation · Alpenglow Foundation · Early Milestones Colorado · Rose Community 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 Community Office for Resource Efficiency funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Community Office for Resource Efficiency. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    16report 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 111 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Community Office for Resource Efficiency’s filings →

    More from the funding graph