Skip to content

· Private foundation

Coutts & Clark Western Foundation Inc

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$133k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it funds
0182% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Philanthropy$278kInternational$204kHealth$188kEducation$139kHuman Services$134kEnvironment$100kArts & Culture$28kFood & Nutrition$15kOther$0
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k3 grants · $12k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $71k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$16,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$1.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Fort Lewis College$50,000
Stewardship Utah$30,000
Companeros$25,000
Fort Lewis College Foundation$16,000
Bear Smart DBA Community Foundation$6,000
Fort Lewis College$5,000
Wellspring Health Access$1,000
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 (FY20–24, $90k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%Companeros: $25k → 12%COMPANEROS: $20k → 12%COMPANEROS: $20k → 12%COMPANEROS: $15k → 12%COMPANEROS: $10k → 12%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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.1M · 17 repeat orgs$114k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +52% since the first grant, against -27% for those funded once.

17 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 15 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
12

Total granted

$1.1M
$61k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+52%
-27%

Still filing today

59%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 60% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $53k 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
HealthEducationCommunity ImprovementPhilanthropyEnvironmentArts & CultureOther
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

  • SF
    Shanta Foundation Inc
    7× · 2017–2023 · $201k · revenue +154%
  • RM
    ROCKY MOUNTAIN PLANNED PARENTHOOD INC
    6× · 2017–2023 · $109k · revenue +38%
  • CF
    COMPANEROS FOUR CORNERS IMMIGRANT RESOURCE CENTER
    5× · 2020–2024 · $90k · revenue +52%

Funded once

  • POPULATION CONNECTIONgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue +97%
  • PF
    Project Feast
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue -27%
  • D
    D-SNIP
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
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
Colorado Museum of Natural History

Be a catalyst! Ignite our community's passion for nature and science.

Arts & Culture
2
University Cooperative School

We take a joyful, community-oriented approach to raising engaged citizens, deep learners, and brave adventurers with the skills, creativity, and heart needed to better the world.

—
3
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
4
Community Foundation Santa Cruz County

To promote philanthropy to make santa cruz county a better place to live, now and in the future.we bring together people, ideas, and resources to inspire philanthropy and accomplish great things.

Philanthropy
5
Conservation Legacy

Conservation legacy engages future leaders who protect, restore, and enhance our nation's lands through community-based service.in 2024, conservation legacy engaged 2,524 participants who completed over 1.5 million service hours on public…

Youth Development
6
Colorado Legal Services

To provide meaningful access to high quality, civil legal services in the pursuit of justice for as many low income persons and members of vulnerable populations throughout colorado as possible.

Crime & Legal
7
Midwives College of Utah

Educate and train midwives to provide safe, professional, affordable and personal maternity and general health care.

Education
8
Santa Fe Community Foundation

The santa fe community foundation inspires philanthropic generosity, strengthens nonprofits, and fosters positive change to build a more vibrant, healthy, and resilient region. the foundation's vision is a thriving northern new mexico,…

Philanthropy
9
Cowiche Canyon Conservancy

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

—
10
The Water Research Foundation

The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…

Environment
11
Minnesota Council on Foundations

MCF is a vibrant philanthropic community connecting, strengthening and mobilizing the power of philanthropy to advance prosperity and equity.

—
12
The Vermont Community Foundation

The vermont community foundation helps to build philanthropic resources to sustain healthy and vital vermont communities. the foundation connects and mobilizes people through giving to multiply the impact of philanthropy.

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood Inc; the most unlike its peers is Clc Foundation. 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

16 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. 16 of the 33 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
10/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FORT LEWIS COLLEGE: $106,850 · OtherFORT LEWIS COLLEGEWomens Resource Center in Durango: $42,500 · OtherWomens Resource Center in Durang…Individual grant recipient: $28,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $20,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $15,000 · OtherJOHNSONBURG HIGH SCHOOL: $13,600 · OtherTHE POWERHOUSE: $27,000 · OtherTHE POWERHOUSE+15 more: $80,900 · Other+15 moreCLC FOUNDATION: $278,176 · PhilanthropyCLC FOUNDATIONShanta Foundation Inc: $200,500 · Community ImprovementShanta Foundation IncSTEWARDSHIP UTAH: $30,000 · Community ImprovementSTEWARDSHIP UTAHROCKY MOUNTAIN PLANNED PARENTHOOD INC: $109,000 · HealthROCKY MOUNTA…WELLNESS AND PREVENTION FOUNDATION: $18,000 · HealthWELLNESS AND…+1 more: $1,000 · HealthCOMPANEROS FOUR CORNERS IMMIGRANT RESOURCE CENTER: $90,000 · Human ServicesMOUNTAIN STUDIES INSTITUE: $69,500 · EnvironmentAnimas High School: $31,530 · EducationTHE FORT LEWIS COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $16,000 · EducationLiberty School Inc: $4,500 · Education
Other$333,850Philanthropy$278,176Community Improvement$230,500Health$128,000Human Services$90,000Environment$69,500Education$52,030

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 budgetCLC FOUNDATION: $278,176 over 7y, 35% of budgetShanta Foundation Inc: $200,500 over 7y, 7.4% of budgetROCKY MOUNTAIN PLANNED PARENTHOOD INC: $109,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetCOMPANEROS FOUR CORNERS IMMIGRANT RESOURCE CENTER: $90,000 over 5y, 6.4% of budgetMOUNTAIN STUDIES INSTITUE: $69,500 over 6y, 1.4% of budgetWomens Resource Center in Durango: $42,500 over 6y, 4.1% of budgetAnimas High School: $31,530 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetSTEWARDSHIP UTAH: $30,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetTHE POWERHOUSE: $27,000 over 4y, 1.8% of budgetWELLNESS AND PREVENTION FOUNDATION: $18,000 over 6y, 1.5% of budgetTHE FORT LEWIS COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $16,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetProject Feast: $10,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetLiberty School Inc: $4,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $3,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCIRCLE OF HOPE HEALTH CARE SVCS INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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 CLC FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Shanta Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds ROCKY MOUNTAIN PLANNED PARENTHOOD INC ↗
  • Who funds COMPANEROS FOUR CORNERS IMMIGRANT RESOURCE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds MOUNTAIN STUDIES INSTITUE ↗
  • Who funds Womens Resource Center in Durango ↗
  • Who funds Animas High School ↗
  • Who funds STEWARDSHIP UTAH ↗
  • Who funds THE POWERHOUSE ↗
  • Who funds WELLNESS AND PREVENTION FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE FORT LEWIS COLLEGE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds POPULATION CONNECTION ↗
  • Who funds Project Feast ↗
  • Who funds Liberty School Inc ↗
  • Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
  • Who funds CIRCLE OF HOPE HEALTH CARE SVCS INC ↗

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.

Community Foundation Serving Southwest ColoradoCO20× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation Serving Southwest Colorado · Ballantine Family Fund · Colorado Gives Foundation · The Moniker Foundation · Team Up · Westmeath Foundation · Gates Family Foundation · El Pomar Foundation · Baird Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Coutts & Clark Western Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Coutts & Clark Western Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Coutts & Clark Western Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Coutts & Clark Western Foundation Inc through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 33 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-PF 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 Coutts & Clark Western’s filings →

    More from the funding graph