· Public charity
Education Reform Now Advocacy Inc
Education reform now advocacy, inc.
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 17 grants below total $919,747 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $1,579,725 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $659,978 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.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k3 grants · $20k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $90k
- $50k–250k8 grants · $810k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| DFER DC IEC | $190,000 |
| DFER GA PAC | $184,747 |
| CITIZENS FOR A GREAT DENVER | $100,000 |
| BLUE RISING TOGETHER | $100,000 |
| DENVER STUDENTS FAMILIES AND TEACHERS UNITED FOR EXCELLENT SCHOOLS | $85,000 |
| THE COMMITTEE TO PRESERVE EDUCATIONAL STANDARDS FOR K-12 STUDENTS | $50,000 |
| DFER MA PAC | $50,000 |
| COLORADO COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK ACTION | $50,000 |
| COLLECTIVE FUTURE | $35,000 |
| LEGACY 44 | $15,000 |
| VOTE TO LIVE ACTION FUND | $10,000 |
| PENNSYLVANIA 2024 | $10,000 |
| TEXAS DEMOCRATIC PARTY | $10,000 |
| LOUISIANA DEMOCRATIC PARTY | $10,000 |
| TEXAS JUSTICE FUND | $7,500 |
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 (FY17–19, $35k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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 +47% since the first grant, against +2% for the ones you funded once.
28 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2024, 20 since wound down; 9 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, 48% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $479k 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
- BEBLACK ECONOMIC ALLIANCE2× · 2020–2022 · $125k · revenue +58%
- CCCOLORADO COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK ACTION4× · 2020–2024 · $91k · revenue +273%
- LVLATINO VICTORY PROJECT2× · 2020–2022 · $70k · revenue +47%
Funded once
- GJGOOD JOBS COLORADOone grant, 2018 · $650k
- ABA BRIGHTER HEALTHIER FUTURE FOR COLORADOS KIDSone grant, 2020 · $535k
- CFCOLORADANS FOR PROSPERITYone grant, 2019 · $400k
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.
To oppose a colorado statewide ballot initiative to join the national popular vote compact
Colorado people's action (cpa) is a member-driven, racial justice organization dedicated to winning long-lasting progressive public policies in colorado. cpa builds power by mobilizing voters, electing our own people to office, holding…
To educate and inform voters
To oppose statewide ballot measures that would restrict local district revenue and support statewide ballot measures that would protect local district revenue.
The organization is focused on holding special interest networks accountable and advancing conservative principles. We're fighting for limited government, lowering taxes, fighting government over-regulation that stifles freedom, free…
To promote the common good and general welfare of americans by promoting public policy that strengthens the economy, promotes job growth, and supports fair and reasonable business regulations.
The Colorado Democracy Alliance is an organization committed to protecting democracy and expanding Colorados civic engagement ecosystem.
The mission of the organization is to conduct research and analysis of conditions affecting the Colorado state economy and promote policies that strengthen the state economy.
Educate the general public about important policy issues.
The colorado ethics institute (cei) was founded to protect the general public by ensuring that public officials comply with ethics codes, transparency rules, and that they follow their oaths of office. cei frequently communicates with the…
Social welfare.
Coloradans for food justice is building community power by making sure that every eater in colorado has a voice to make transformative change that represents a more just food system by mobilizing values-driven voters statewide.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Colorado Values Project and the most unlike its peers is Texas Justice Fund. 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.
36 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. 36 of the 88 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 A BRIGHTER HEALTHIER FUTURE FOR COLORADOS KIDS ↗
- Who funds COLORADANS FOR PROSPERITY ↗
- Who funds COLORADO VALUES PROJECT ↗
- Who funds LEAD COLORADO ↗
- Who funds VOTO LATINO INC ↗
- Who funds BLACK ECONOMIC ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds BLUE RISING TOGETHER ↗
- Who funds COLORADO COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK ACTION ↗
- Who funds CLCS ACTION ↗
- Who funds LATINO VICTORY PROJECT ↗
- Who funds DENVER COMMITS TO KIDS ↗
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: Sixteen Thirty Fund · America Votes · American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees · Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains Action Fund Inc · Future Forward USA Action · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · Brighter Future for Colorado · Conservation Colorado · Stand for Children Inc · Campaign for Great Public Schools · Green Advocacy Project · Our American Future Action
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 Education Reform Now Advocacy 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.