Skip to content
Forever Our Rivers Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Private foundation

Forever Our Rivers Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$354k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$291k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2024.

Environment$872kCommunity Improvement$165kYouth Development$18kArts & Culture$6kHealth$5kAnimals$3kHuman Services$3kOther$0
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $18k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $45k
  • $250k+1 grant · $291k
$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$725k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Conservation Legacy$291,343
Forever Our Rivers$35,000
Rio Grande Restoration Foundation$10,000
High Country Conservation Advocates$7,000
Friends of Youth and Nature$6,000
Spirit of the Sun$5,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 85% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Friends of the Verde River: $50k → 14%Gila Watershed Partnership: $40k → 15%Casting for Recovery: $5k → 10%Brown Folks Fishing: $3k → 12%Grand Staircase Escalante Partners: $39k → 9%Grand Staircase Escalante Partners: $88k → 9%Roaring Fork Conservancy: $3k → 7%Crested Butte Land Trust: $9k → 10%Colorado West Land Trust: $8k → 11%Conservation Legacy: $319k → 12%Institute for Environmental Solutions: $3k → 12%RiGHT - Rio Grande Headwaters Land Trust: $3k → 14%Western Slope Conservation Center: $5k → 15%River Science: $2k → 17%Rio Grande Restoration Foundation: $10k → 17%Pergatoire Watershed Partnership: $2k → 18%Friends of the Verde River: $44k → 14%Gila Watershed Partnership: $37k → 15%Grand Staicase Escalante Partners: $38k → 9%ROARING FORK CONSERVANCY: $1k → 7%High Country Conservation Advocates: $7k → 10%Colorado Canyons Association: $5k → 11%Conservation Legacy: $291k → 12%Spirit of the Sun: $5k → 12%Friends of Youth and Nature: $6k → 15%Rio Grande Headwaters Restoration Project: $8k → 17%Friends of the Verde River: $40k → 14%High Country Conservation Advocates: $4k → 10%Eureka McConnell Science Museum: $3k → 11%Conservation Legacy: $120k → 12%Lincoln Hills Cares: $10k → 12%Friends of Youth and Nature: $5k → 15%FRIENDS OF THE VERDE RIVER: $1k → 14%Colorado Canyons Association: $3k → 11%Four Corners Water Center: $3k → 12%Lincoln Hills Cares: $8k → 12%Friends of Youth and Nature: $1k → 15%Colorado West Land Trust: $3k → 11%Coalitions Collaboratives: $24k → 12%Eureka McConnell Science Museum: $3k → 11%Colorado Water Trust: $7k → 12%Colorado Canyons Association: $3k → 11%Colorado West Land Trust: $2k → 11%CO CANYONS ASSOCIATION: $1k → 11%COLORADO WEST LAND TRUST: $1k → 11%RIVERSEDGE WEST: $1k → 11%Grand Valley Audubon Society: $2k → 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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 9% of Forever Our Rivers Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Forever Our Rivers Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 8.2% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.3M · 13 repeat orgs$127k to everyone else

13 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
17

Total granted

$1.3M
$77k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+19%
+42%

Still filing today

100%
53%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $50k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentYouth DevelopmentArts & CulturePhilanthropyRecreation & SportsHealthOther
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

  • CONSERVATION LEGACY
    3× · 2023–2025 · $730k · revenue +18%
  • GS
    GRAND STAIRCASE - ESCALANTE PARTNERS INC
    3× · 2021–2024 · $165k · revenue +27%
  • RW
    RIVERSEDGE WEST
    3× · 2018–2022 · $115k · revenue +3%

Funded once

  • CC
    Coalitions Collaboratives
    one grant, 2024 · $24k
  • CB
    CRESTED BUTTE LAND TRUST
    one grant, 2024 · $9k · revenue +8%
  • RG
    Rio Grande Headwaters Restoration Project
    one grant, 2023 · $8k
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
Living Rivers

Living rivers promotes river restoration through mobilization by articulating conservation and alternative management strategies to the public. seeking to revive the natural habitat and spirit of rivers by undoing the extensive damage done…

Environment
2
Upper Colorado River Alliance
Environment
3
Forever Our Rivers Foundation
Philanthropy
4
San Juan Resource Conservation and Development Council Inc

San juan resource conservation and development council, inc.'s mission is to protect and improve the natural, cultural, historic and economic resources of the eight county area of southwest colorado.

Environment
5
Falls Creek Wildlands and Trails

Falls Creek Wildlands and Trails FCWT promotes conservation stewardship and responsible recreation in the Falls Creek area through trail development and maintenance environmental restoration and preservation projects and educational…

Environment
6
Colorado Ag Water Alliance

Works with farmers and ranchers to address water issues around the state impacting agriculture.

Environment
7
Big Thompson Watershed Coalition

Vision: a healthy and resilient big thompson watershed benefitting fish, wildlife, and the people itserves through collaborative efforts for current and future generations. mission: working with others to take action that protects and…

Environment
8
The Grand Canyon Trust Inc

The mission of the grand canyon trust is to safeguard the wonders of the grand canyon and the colorado plateau, while supporting the rights of its native peoples.

Environment
9
Colorado Wildlife Heritage Foundation Inc

The mission of the Colorado Wildlife Heritage Foundation is to provide a legacy for Colorado through support of environmental stewardship conservation of wildlife and the protection of critical habitat.

Animals
10
Wood River Land Trust Co

The wood river land trust's mission is to protect and sustain the treasured landscapes and life-giving waters of the wood river valley and to inspire love for this special place for generations to come.

Environment
11
Uviation World Water

To leverage education, technology, and innovative solutions to improve river health.

Environment
12
Colorado Open Lands

Colorado open lands' mission is to preserve the significant open lands and natural heritage of colorado through private and public partnerships, innovative land conservation, and strategic leadership.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Grand Staircase Escalante Partners Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Institute for Environmental Solutions. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

24 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. 24 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
24/24
Grantees still filing
17/24
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CONSERVATION LEGACY: $730,074 · Youth DevelopmentCONSERVATION LEGACY+1 more: $12,000 · Youth DevelopmentGRAND STAIRCASE - ESCALANTE PARTNERS INC: $165,366 · EnvironmentGRAND STAIRCASE - ESCALANTE PARTNE…RIVERSEDGE WEST: $114,703 · EnvironmentRIVERSEDGE WESTGila Watershed Partnership of Arizona: $76,482 · EnvironmentGila Watershed Partnership of Ariz…FOREVER OUR RIVERS: $35,000 · EnvironmentFOREVER OUR RIVERS+7 more: $42,975 · Environment+7 moreFRIENDS OF THE VERDE RIVER: $134,737 · PhilanthropyFRIENDS OF…Coalitions Collaboratives: $23,750 · OtherHIGH COUNTRY CONSERVATION ADVOCATES: $10,750 · OtherRio Grande Restoration Foundation: $10,000 · OtherRio Grande Headwaters Restoration Project: $8,000 · OtherNFRIA-WSERC CONSERVATION CENTER INC: $5,000 · OtherSpirit of the Sun Inc: $5,000 · Other+8 more: $13,500 · OtherLINCOLN HILLS CARES: $17,500 · Arts & CultureEUREKA MCCONNELL SCIENCE MUSEUM: $5,500 · Arts & CultureCOLORADO CANYONS ASSOCIATION: $11,000 · Recreation & SportsCASTING FOR RECOVERY: $5,000 · HealthOREGON WILDLIFE HERITAGE FOUNDATION: $2,500 · Animals
Youth Development$742,074Environment$434,526Philanthropy$134,737Other$76,000Arts & Culture$23,000Recreation & Sports$11,000Health$5,000Animals$2,500

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCONSERVATION LEGACY: $730,074 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetGRAND STAIRCASE - ESCALANTE PARTNERS INC: $165,366 over 3y, 10% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE VERDE RIVER: $134,737 over 4y, 3.2% of budgetRIVERSEDGE WEST: $114,703 over 3y, 9.3% of budgetGila Watershed Partnership of Arizona: $76,482 over 2y, 6.6% of budgetFOREVER OUR RIVERS: $35,000 over 1y, 72% of budgetLINCOLN HILLS CARES: $17,500 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetMESA COUNTY LAND CONSERVANCY INC: $13,975 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF YOUTH AND NATURE: $12,000 over 3y, 2.7% of budgetCOLORADO CANYONS ASSOCIATION: $11,000 over 4y, 1.1% of budgetHIGH COUNTRY CONSERVATION ADVOCATES: $10,750 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetCRESTED BUTTE LAND TRUST: $8,500 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCOLORADO WATER TRUST: $7,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetSan Juan Citizens Alliance: $6,500 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetEUREKA MCCONNELL SCIENCE MUSEUM: $5,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetNFRIA-WSERC CONSERVATION CENTER INC: $5,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetCASTING FOR RECOVERY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSpirit of the Sun Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetROARING FORK CONSERVANCY: $3,500 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetOREGON WILDLIFE HERITAGE FOUNDATION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE INSTITUTE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS: $2,500 over 1y, 3.5% of budgetGRAND VALLEY AUDUBON SOCIETY: $2,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetColorado Riverfront Foundation Inc: $1,000 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.

Colorado Gives Founda…PatagoniaorgWestern Colorado Comm…National Fish and Wil…Western Conservation …National Forest Found…Walton Family Foundat…Colorado Watershed As…Gates Family Foundati…The Nature ConservancyXcel Energy FoundationConservation Lands Fo…
Colorado Gives FoundationCO32.6× affinity15 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Colorado Gives Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Western Colorado Community Foundation Inc · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Western Conservation Foundation · National Forest Foundation · Walton Family Foundation Inc · Colorado Watershed Assembly · Gates Family Foundation · The Nature Conservancy · Xcel Energy Foundation · Conservation Lands 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 Forever Our Rivers Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Forever Our Rivers Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 16%
  • Oregon Wildlife Heritage Foundation: 16% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
11report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
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.

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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Forever Our Rivers’ 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