· Public charity
Conservation Colorado Education Fund
We work to turn environmental values into state priorities through educating decision-makers and building community leaders to protect what makes our state unlike any other - our spectacular natural environment.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 1 grants below total $10,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $10,670 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $670 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.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CONSERVATION COLORADO | $10,000 |
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 86% 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.
5 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
- SESOUTHWEST ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT6× · 2018–2023 · $411k · revenue +11%
- CPCOLORADO PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC6× · 2018–2023 · $187k · revenue +113%
- WRWestern Resource Advocates4× · 2018–2022 · $105k · revenue +12%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2018 · $250k
- PCPROTECT COLORADOS RECOVERYone grant, 2020 · $86k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2021 · $40k
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.
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 restore water to colorado's rivers.
To unite, elevate and empower colorado's conservation community to protect the lands and waters that define our state.
To oppose a colorado statewide ballot initiative to join the national popular vote compact
Colorado open lands' mission is to preserve the significant open lands and natural heritage of colorado through private and public partnerships, innovative land conservation, and strategic leadership.
To protect, conserve, and restore colorado's native wildlife and habitats. we champion science-based, innovative, collaborative solutions for managing colorado's iconic wildlife and biodiversity, protecting them from threats like habitat…
To educate the public about responsible fracking practices and energy development and urging voters to reject state wide ballot initiatives banning enegry development and to support initiatives that promote responsible energy development.
Our mission is to expand solar and storage markets and to generate jobs and prosperity for the people of Colorado. Together with hundreds of solar and storage business members we work to advance clean energy policies, remove market…
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…
San juan resource conservation and development council, inc.'s mission is to protect and improve the natural, cultural, historic and economic resources of the eight county area of southwest colorado.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Conservation Colorado and the most unlike its peers is Colorado Civic Education. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
19 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. 19 of the 23 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 SOUTHWEST ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT ↗
- Who funds COLORADO PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Western Resource Advocates ↗
- Who funds CLEAN ENERGY ECONOMY FOR THE REGION ↗
- Who funds PROTECT COLORADOS RECOVERY ↗
- Who funds COLORADO CIVIC EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds EAGLE RIVER WATERSHED COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds COLORADO FARM & FOOD ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE YAMPA INC ↗
- Who funds COLORADO ORGANIZATION FOR LATINA OPPORTUNITY AND REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds THE ARCHER GROUP ↗
- Who funds San Juan Citizens Alliance ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION COLORADO ↗
- Who funds American Whitewater ↗
- Who funds WILDERNESS WORKSHOP ↗
- Who funds THE AMERICAS FOR THE ARTS ↗
- Who funds COLORADANS FOR COLORADANS ↗
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 · Western Conservation Foundation · The Denver Foundation · United States Energy Foundation · The Pew Charitable Trusts · Gill Foundation · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · Hopewell Fund · Rose Community Foundation · The Colorado Health Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program
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 Conservation Colorado Education Fund 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.
- American Whitewater — 5% of income from government
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.