Skip to content
Dan and Sheila Berlin Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Dan and Sheila Berlin 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.

$300k
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$150k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0188% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

Education$507kEmployment$250kHuman Services$170kYouth Development$120kEnvironment$60kHealth$56kFood & Nutrition$40kHousing & Shelter$30kOther$0
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k11 grants · $150k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $150k
$11,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$5.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$150,000
COLORADO UPLIFT$43,000
BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB$11,000
THE MATTHEWS HOUSE$11,000
DISABLED RESOURCE SERVICES$11,000
WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN$11,000
PROJECT SELF-SUFFICIENCY$11,000
DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS$11,000
DIVINE LOVE WORLD CHARITY$10,800
N TO N - NORTH DENVER CARES$10,000
TBB - TALENT BEYOND BOARDARIES INC$10,000
ACHILLES INTERNATIONAL$10,000
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 (FY19–25, $173k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, 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%DIVINE LOVE WORLD CHARITY: $11k → 17%TEAM SEE POSSIBILITIES: $75k → 11%TEAM SEE POSSIBILITIES: $35k → 11%THE MATTHEWS HOUSE: $11k → 11%DISABLED RESOURCE SERVICES: $11k → 11%HOMEWARD ALLIANCE: $10k → 11%DISABLED RESOURCE SERVICES: $10k → 11%DISABLED RESOURCE SERVICES: $10k → 11%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.
$1.6M · 16 repeat orgs$186k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +21% since the first grant, against +15% for those funded once.

16 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
9

Total granted

$1.6M
$112k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+21%
+15%

Still filing today

63%
56%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 75% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $74k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesInternationalFood & NutritionHealthArts & CultureEducationOther
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

  • TS
    Team See Possibililtes
    2× · 2020–2021 · $110k · revenue +75% · 68% of their budget
  • CU
    COLORADO UPLIFT INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $108k · revenue +41%
  • TW
    TREES WATER AND PEOPLE
    3× · 2019–2021 · $60k · revenue +104%

Funded once

  • NT
    NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $20k · revenue +434%
  • CS
    CROSSROADS SAFEHOUSE INC
    one grant, 2020 · $20k · revenue +15%
  • SF
    SALUD FAMILY HEALTH CENTER
    one grant, 2020 · $20k
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
Lifeworks Services Inc

Lifeworks' mission is to partner with people with disabilities to drive change by increasing opportunity and access in the community.

Human Services
2
Marrakech Inc

Provides person-centered and inclusive services to children and adults with and without disabilities that includes securing employment, connecting to necessary supportive services, accessing housing and participating fully as contributing…

Employment
3
Activate Work Inc

We provide training, coaching, community supports and access to leading colorado employers enabling coloradans to acheive economic security, mobility and prosperity.

Human Services
4
Restoringvision

To empower lives by restoring vision for millions of people in need.

Health
5
Visability

Provide innovative training and tools for people who are blind or visually impaired to help them achieve their goals and dreams

Human Services
6
Domestic Violence Initiative for Women With Disabilities

Empowering victims and creating a bridge to close the gap for people with disabilities through discovery of self-resiliency by providing support and services.

—
7
Colorado Village Collaborative

Empowering community, enacting change. colorado village collaborative exists to bridge the gap between the streets and stable housing by creating and operating transformational shelter communities in partnership with people experiencing…

Housing & Shelter
8
Vision for Chicago

Vision for Chicago is a community-based nonprofit dedicated to advancing equitable access to comprehensive eye care for young adults in underserved neighborhoods. Through localized programs we provide free vision screenings and…

Health
9
Do for One Nyc

To serve people with developmental disabilities

Human Services
10
Viability Inc

Viability's mission is to build a world in which individuals with disabilities and other disadvantages realize acceptance, inclusion, and access.

Employment
11
A Shared Vision Partners in Pediatric Blindness and Visual Imp

A Shared Vision educates, inspires, and empowers families to nurture the development of their young children who are blind or visually impaired. We provide early intervention vision services in families' homes and community settings…

Health
12
Colorado Center On Law and Policy

Colorado center on law and policy is an antipoverty organization advancing the rights of every coloradan.

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Project Self-Sufficiency of Northern Colorado; the most unlike its peers is Sea to See. 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

20 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. 20 of the 32 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
15/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $387,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipientPENN STATE UNIVERSITY: $325,000 · OtherPENN STATE UNIVERSITYPSU ALUMNI ASSOCIATION - FASTSTART - BRIDGES TO SUCCESS: $175,000 · OtherPSU ALUMNI ASSOCIATION - FASTSTART - BRIDGES TO SUCCESS+16 more: $270,098 · Other+16 moreSea to See: $250,000 · Arts & CultureSea to SeeTeam See Possibililtes: $110,000 · Human ServicesTeam See P…DISABLED RESOURCE SERVICES INC: $31,000 · Human ServicesDISABLED R…THE MATTHEWS HOUSE: $11,000 · Human ServicesTHE MATTHE…DIVINE LOVE WORLD CHARITY INC: $10,800 · Human ServicesDIVINE LOV…HOMEWARD ALLIANCE INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesHOMEWARD A…COLORADO UPLIFT INC: $108,000 · EducationTREES WATER AND PEOPLE: $60,000 · EnvironmentTHE GEM FOUNDATION: $21,000 · InternationalWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $11,000 · InternationalMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $11,000 · InternationalThe Food Bank for Larimer County: $30,000 · Food & NutritionMEALS ON WHEELS FOR FORT COLLINS COLORADO INC: $10,000 · Food & Nutrition
Other$1,157,598Arts & Culture$250,000Human Services$172,800Education$108,000Environment$60,000International$43,000Food & Nutrition$40,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSea to See: $250,000 over 3y, 90% of budgetTeam See Possibililtes: $110,000 over 2y, 68% of budgetCOLORADO UPLIFT INC: $108,000 over 6y, 0.6% of budgetTREES WATER AND PEOPLE: $60,000 over 3y, 1.8% of budgetPROJECT SELF-SUFFICIENCY OF NORTHERN COLORADO: $31,000 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetDISABLED RESOURCE SERVICES INC: $31,000 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetThe Food Bank for Larimer County: $30,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE GEM FOUNDATION: $21,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetNEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetCROSSROADS SAFEHOUSE INC: $20,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetMAB COMMUNITY SERVICES INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCerebral Palsy Alliance Research Foundation: $16,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS FOR FORT COLLINS COLORADO INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetHOMEWARD ALLIANCE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% 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.

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.

Woodward Governor Cha…Community Foundation …Anschutz Family Found…Otter Cares Foundatio…Colorado Gives Founda…United Way of Larimer…El Pomar FoundationThe Poudre Sand FundColina FoundationThe Food Bank for Lar…Av Hunter Trust Incor…Nextfifty Initiative
Woodward Governor Charitable TrustIL17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Woodward Governor Charitable Trust · Community Foundation of Northern Colorado · Anschutz Family Foundation · Otter Cares Foundation AKA OTTERCARES FOUNDATION · Colorado Gives Foundation · United Way of Larimer County · El Pomar Foundation · The Poudre Sand Fund · Colina Foundation · The Food Bank for Larimer County · Av Hunter Trust Incorporated · Nextfifty Initiative

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 Dan and Sheila Berlin Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Dan and Sheila Berlin Foundation. 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%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 69%
  • Mab Community Services Inc: 69% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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 Dan and Sheila Berlin Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Dan and Sheila Berlin Foundation 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 32 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Dan and Sheila Berlin’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home