· Public charity
Developmental Pathways Inc
To enrich the lives of people with disabilities/delays by partnering to provide expertise, support, and advocacy in their pursuit of a meaningful life.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k4 grants · $31k
- $10k–50k33 grants · $785k
- $50k–250k7 grants · $747k
- $250k+1 grant · $2.7M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CONTINUUM OF COLORADO INC | $2,666,000 |
| PARKER PERSONAL CARE HOMES INC | $215,433 |
| COTTONWOOD COMMUNITY ALTERNATIVES INC | $175,817 |
| EL GRUPO VIDA INC | $115,000 |
| EXCEPTIONAL KIDS INC DBA HIGHPOINTE SERVICES | $76,800 |
| CASTLE ROCK THERAPIES LLC DBA FYZICAL THERAPY AND BALANCE CENTERS | $61,300 |
| WELLSPRING COMMUNITY | $52,840 |
| TACT KIDS INC | $50,000 |
| PROMISE RANCH THERAPIES AND RECREATION DBA AFFINITY RANCH | $47,985 |
| CHIKA EMELDA DURUEKE DBA HEART OF GOLD HOME CARE LLC | $47,700 |
| INTEGRATED LIFE CHOICES | $44,000 |
| JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF COLORADO INC | $41,852 |
| GIGI'S PLAYHOUSE INC DBA GIGI'S PLAYHOUSE - DENVER LLC | $37,875 |
| CONSULTANTS FOR CHILDREN INC | $35,000 |
| ANTHONY VERDUCCI DBA WAYFINDER CLINIC CO | $31,875 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $18.5M) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 97% of those 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 +17% since the first grant, against +4% for the ones you funded once.
75 repeat relationships — 33 still active in FY2025, 42 since wound down; 12 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, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $314k 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
- CCCOTTONWOOD COMMUNITY ALTERNATIVES6× · 2020–2025 · $814k · revenue +25%
- WCWELLSPRING COMMUNITY5× · 2021–2025 · $506k · revenue +72%
- SFSUN FOUNDATION3× · 2017–2019 · $458k · revenue +121% · 51% of their budget
Funded once
- YHYOUTH HOUSING COLORADOone grant, 2018 · $550k · revenue -33%
- DCDOUGLAS COUNTYone grant, 2022 · $250k
- TLTHE LIMINAL COLLECTIVE NPOone grant, 2023 · $122k · revenue -61% · 28% of their budget
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.
The organization was incorporated in 1952 to provide Educational, Social and Therapeutic programs and related activities for persons with Cerebral Palsy and other disabilities, as well as research aimed at preventing Cerebral Palsy.
Provide adaptive sports for the disabled.
We embrace the power of community to support individuals and families in creating their future. we do this by: simplifying access, celebrating individuality, and bridging communities.
Providing opportunities and environments to build bright futures. Our House provides residential and Day Program Services to adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities. The focus is on building independent living skills,…
The Arc of West Central Colorado is organized exclusively for charitable, religious, educational and scientific purposes, including, for such purposes, the making of distributions to organizations that qualify as exempt organizations…
Creating access to resources by connecting opportunities for people of all disabilities, their families and communities, from Aspen to Parachute.
Promote, strengthen, and support individuals with disabilities and their families and caregivers. Our purpose is to provide support services to families who have a family member with a disability in a manner that provides opportunity to…
The arc of colorado provides individual and systems change advocacy for persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities (idd) residing in colorado and their families.
Help the spinal cord injury and related paralysis community through adaptive exercise and integrative therapy programs
To advocate for social justice for people with all types of disabilities.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Continuum of Colorado Inc and the most unlike its peers is Sky Cliff Stroke Center. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 14 years old; the field is 14. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 13% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.6% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
69 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. 69 of the 162 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 CONTINUUM OF COLORADO INC ↗
- Who funds COTTONWOOD COMMUNITY ALTERNATIVES ↗
- Who funds YOUTH HOUSING COLORADO ↗
- Who funds WELLSPRING COMMUNITY ↗
- Who funds SUN FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds COLORADO INSTITUTE OF DEVELOPMENTAL PEDIATRICS INC ↗
- Who funds EL GRUPO VIDA INC ↗
- Who funds Promise Ranch Therapeutic Riding ↗
- Who funds TACT KIDS INC ↗
- Who funds ABLELIGHT INC ↗
- Who funds THE LIMINAL COLLECTIVE NPO ↗
- Who funds JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF COLORADO INC ↗
- Who funds REVEL ↗
- Who funds SPECIAL OLYMPICS COLORADO ↗
- Who funds TREELINE PASS INC ↗
- Who funds EXCEPTIONAL KIDS INC ↗
- Who funds GUIDED BY HUMANITY ↗
- Who funds CARING VOICES ↗
- Who funds THE STAR CENTER FOUNDATION DBA STAR INSTITUTE FOR SENSORY PROCESSING ↗
- Who funds DEVELOPMENTAL FX DEVELOPMENTAL & FRAGILE X RESOURCE ↗
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 · The Denver Foundation · Daniels Fund · Rose Community Foundation · The Denver Children's Foundation · Schlessman Foundation Inc · Western Union Foundation · Gates Family Foundation · Temple Hoyne Buell Foundation · The Colorado Health Foundation · Disabling Barriers · Kenneth Kendal King Foundation
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 Developmental Pathways Inc 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.