· Private foundation
Flug Family 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.
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 · $14k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $61k
- $50k–250k4 grants · $410k
- $250k+1 grant · $600k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| DENISON UNIVERSITY | $600,000 |
| FANTASY CAMPS FOR KIDS | $200,000 |
| PARKINSONS RESEARCH AND EDUCATION FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION | $60,000 |
| MAKE-A-WISH COLORADO | $50,000 |
| WEST CHOP COMMUNITY FUND | $31,000 |
| VINEYARD HOUSE INC | $30,000 |
| SHINING STAR FOUNDATION | $6,000 |
| ALEXANDER TWILIGHT ACADEMY | $5,000 |
| SHERIFF'S MEADOW FOUNDATION | $2,000 |
| FOOD BANK OF THE ROCKIES | $1,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–22, $77k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 17% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 +79% since the first grant, against +26% for the ones you funded once.
16 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down; 5 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, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $142k 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
- DUDENISON UNIVERSITY9× · 2017–2025 · $3.0M · revenue +39%
- KDKENT DENVER COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL6× · 2017–2022 · $1.0M · revenue +75%
- UOUNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION9× · 2017–2025 · $339k · revenue +79%
Funded once
- BTBROOKLINE TEEN CENTERgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $50k · revenue +36%
- FCFANTASY CAMPS FOR KIDS3× · 2023–2025 · $50k · revenue 0% · 25% of their budget
- VVHPLBFIone grant, 2021 · $20k
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 bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
Dartmouth College educates the most promising students and prepares them for a lifetime of learning and of responsible leadership, through a faculty dedicated to teaching and the creation of knowledge.
The peak school seeks to ignite a passion for learning, to develop students of diverse talents and backgrounds who think critically and act with integrity, and to graduate compassionate, confident, capable students who will embrace their…
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
Wentworth institute of technology is a nationally recognized private coeducational and residential university of higher education with a mission to empower, inspire and innovate through experiential learning with a core purpose of career…
Creating curious, kind, courageous, and adventurous learners and leaders.
Fountain valley school of colorado provides a transformative curriculum in a supportive environment where students are challenged to think critically, become leaders, and live by our core values: courage, compassion, curiosity,…
Bates is a college of the liberal arts and sciences, and is a coeducational, nonsectarian, residential college with special commitments to academic rigor, and to assuring in all of its efforts the dignity of each individual, and access to…
We create confident learners who lead lives of intellectual curiosity, self-knowledge, and social responsibility.
The university's goal in the coming decade is to advance learning through the integration of teaching, research and service to others. the core of this goal is to prepare graduates to engage with the world and lead lives of meaning. to do…
The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.
Wheaton college provides a transformative liberal arts education, combining theory and practice, for intellectually curious students within a collaborative and vibrant extended community and network that values and strives to create an…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Make-a-Wish Foundation of Colorado and the most unlike its peers is Fantasy Camps for Kids. 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 43 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 7% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
30 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. 30 of the 39 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 DENISON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds KENT DENVER COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds DENVER ACADEMY INC ↗
- Who funds St Anne's Episcopal School Inc ↗
- Who funds SHERIFF'S MEADOW FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CLYFFORD STILL MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds PARKINSONS RESEARCH AND EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds MARTHA'S VINEYARD MUSEUM INC ↗
- Who funds RAISE THE FUTURE ↗
- Who funds PTA Colorado Congress dba South High School PTSA ↗
- Who funds WEST CHOP COMMUNITY FUND INC ↗
- Who funds MAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF COLORADO ↗
- Who funds BROOKLINE TEEN CENTER ↗
- Who funds FANTASY CAMPS FOR KIDS ↗
- Who funds Vineyard House Inc ↗
- Who funds SEB'S RECREATION CENTER ↗
- Who funds ST ELIZABETH'S SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds NO LIMITS FOUNDATION D/B/A CAMP NO LIMITS ↗
- Who funds PRADER-WILLI SYNDROME ASSOCIATION (USA) ↗
- Who funds JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds NoticeAbility Inc ↗
- Who funds ALEXANDER TWILIGHT ACADEMY INC ↗
- Who funds WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds DENVER RESCUE MISSION ↗
- Who funds COLORADO WOMEN'S EMPLOYMENT & EDUCATION INC ↗
- Who funds FOOD BANK OF THE ROCKIES ↗
- Who funds Best Buddies International Inc ↗
- Who funds Mountain Rescue Aspen Inc ↗
- Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
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: Margulf Foundation · The Denver Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · Fantasy Camps for Kids · The Colorado Health Foundation · Kenneth Kendal King Foundation · The Anschutz Foundation · The Janus Henderson Foundation · Mile High United Way Inc · Renaissance Charitable Foundation Inc · Baird Foundation Inc · Jewish Communal Fund
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 Flug Family Foundation 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Johns Hopkins University — 12% of income from government
- Best Buddies International Inc — 4% of income from government
- Sheriff's Meadow Foundation — 2% of income from government
- Brookline Teen Center — 0% 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Flug Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Flug Family 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.