Skip to content

· Private foundation

Gardner 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.

$241k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What it funds
0182% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Community Improvement$825kReligion$627kCivil Rights$275kHuman Services$173kEducation$114kEmployment$57kHousing & Shelter$54kPublic Benefit$50kOther$0
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k6 grants · $20k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $12k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $208k
$8,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$346k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CROSSPURPOSE$100,000
CITYUNITE$58,000
STAND TOGETHER FOUNDATION$50,000
HOPE HOUSE OF COLORADO$12,100
CRU$8,000
ALL IN FOSTERING FUTURES INC$5,000
BEYOND HOME$4,500
SECOND CHANCE BIKE$1,140
REVIVE CHURCH$1,000
HABITAT FOR HUMANITY$783
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, $188k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 62% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%HOPE HOUSE OF COLORADO: $58k → 10%BEAUTIFUL REDEMPTION: $1k → 9%HOPE HOUSE OF COLORADO: $48k → 10%HOPE HOUSE OF COLORADO: $53k → 7%HOPE HOUSE OF COLORADO: $12k → 7%HOPE HOUSE OF COLORADO: $5k → 7%HOPE HOUSE OF COLORADO: $1k → 7%ACTIVATE WORK INC: $10k → 12%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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.7M · 15 repeat orgs$108k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +112% since the first grant, against +56% for those funded once.

15 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
15

Total granted

$2.7M
$105k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+112%
+56%

Still filing today

67%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k 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 ServicesCommunity ImprovementReligionEducationYouth DevelopmentHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • C
    CROSSPURPOSE
    7× · 2019–2025 · $881k · revenue +236%
  • C
    CITYUNITE
    7× · 2019–2025 · $614k · revenue +123% · 44% of their budget
  • HH
    HOPE HOUSE OF COLORADO
    6× · 2019–2025 · $177k · revenue +112%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $25k
  • OT
    OUTSIDE THE BOWL
    one grant, 2019 · $25k · revenue -32%
  • AW
    ACTIVATE WORK INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue +166%
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
Careerwise Colorado

Careerwise's mission is to forge pathways to meaningful careers through bold advocacy, innovative apprenticeships, and industry led partnerships, creating a dynamic talent ecosystem that connects ambition to opportunity for empowered young…

Education
2
Family Housing Network of Fort Collins Inc

Faith Family Hospitality's mission is to support families experiencing homelessness to achieve sustainable self-sufficiency in a timely and dignified manner. This interfaith volunteer effort coordinates the work of 30 diverse Fort Collins…

Human Services
3
Denverworks Inc

To empower the unemployed and those with barriers to employment to become self-supporting through job preparation and placement.

Employment
4
Urban Outreach Denver

Urban Outreach Denver exists to connect people to God and to a community of support by caring for both short-term and long-term needs in the areas of food, clothing, shlter, medical care, education and job preparation.

Human Services
5
Hope and Home

Hope & home creates ways for amazing people to change the lives of children in foster care. as a nondenominational christian charity, hope & home trains, certifies, and actively supports foster families across the state of colorado.…

Human Services
6
Colorado Thrives

Colorado Thrives exists to support Coloradans to achieve economic mobility through access to good jobs.

Community Improvement
7
Hope's Promise Inc

To strengthen families through ethical, christ-centered foster care, adoption, and global orphan care.

Human Services
8
Center for Employment Opportunities Inc

We provide effective employment services to individuals recently released from incarceration.

Employment
9
The WorkWell Partnership

The WorkWell Partnership operates a four-week job training program consisting of training and counseling, with qualified trainers, mentors, and advocates helping to prepare formerly incarcerated citizens for employment that can be…

Education
10
Urban Peak Denver

Urban peak helps youth experiencing homelessness and youth at risk of becoming homeless overcome real life challenges by providing essential services and a supportive community, empowering them to become self-sufficient adults.

Housing & Shelter
11
Child Welfare Innovation Inc

Foster America works with communities and governments to strengthen the systems that support children, youth, and families - so families can access help earlier, with dignity, trust, and connection, and without unnecessary child welfare…

Human Services
12
Work Options for Women Dba Work Options

Work options for women helps people overcome barriers to sustainable employment by building confidence while providing resources and culinary training.

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Hope House of Colorado; the most unlike its peers is Outside the Bowl. 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

16 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. 16 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)
16/16
Grantees still filing
12/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CROSSPURPOSE: $880,686 · Community ImprovementCROSSPURPOSEWORKWELL: $44,448 · Community ImprovementCITYUNITE: $613,555 · ReligionCITYUNITEThe Denver Institute: $55,000 · ReligionThe Denver InstituteSTAND TOGETHER: $275,000 · OtherSTAND TOGETHERIndividual grant recipient: $250,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCRU: $45,000 · OtherCRUIndividual grant recipient: $25,000 · OtherMile High Workshop Inc: $47,000 · OtherMile High Workshop IncOUTSIDE THE BOWL: $25,000 · Other+16 more: $67,460 · Other+16 moreHOPE HOUSE OF COLORADO: $177,140 · Human ServicesACTIVATE WORK INC: $10,000 · Human Services+1 more: $1,000 · Human ServicesALLIANCE FOR CHOICE IN EDUCATION: $106,000 · EducationExecutives Partnering to Invest in Children (EPIC): $5,000 · EducationStand Together Foundation: $100,000 · Public BenefitCOLORADO HOMELESS FAMILIES INC: $58,530 · Housing & Shelter
Community Improvement$925,134Religion$668,555Other$734,460Human Services$188,140Education$111,000Public Benefit$100,000Housing & Shelter$58,530

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCROSSPURPOSE: $880,686 over 7y, 3.2% of budgetCITYUNITE: $613,555 over 7y, 44% of budgetHOPE HOUSE OF COLORADO: $177,140 over 6y, 2.1% of budgetALLIANCE FOR CHOICE IN EDUCATION: $106,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetStand Together Foundation: $100,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetCOLORADO HOMELESS FAMILIES INC: $58,530 over 6y, 1.7% of budgetThe Denver Institute: $55,000 over 3y, 2.5% of budgetMile High Workshop Inc: $47,000 over 4y, 2.1% of budgetWORKWELL: $44,448 over 2y, 19% of budgetOUTSIDE THE BOWL: $25,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetACTIVATE WORK INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetAll In Empowering Futures Inc: $8,037 over 4y, 16% of budgetHOPE FOR HAITI'S CHILDREN MINISTRIES INCORPORATED: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetExecutives Partnering to Invest in Children (EPIC): $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBEAUTIFUL REDEMPTION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

  • Who funds CROSSPURPOSE ↗
  • Who funds CITYUNITE ↗
  • Who funds HOPE HOUSE OF COLORADO ↗
  • Who funds ALLIANCE FOR CHOICE IN EDUCATION ↗
  • Who funds Stand Together Foundation ↗
  • Who funds COLORADO HOMELESS FAMILIES INC ↗
  • Who funds The Denver Institute ↗
  • Who funds Mile High Workshop Inc ↗
  • Who funds WORKWELL ↗
  • Who funds OUTSIDE THE BOWL ↗
  • Who funds ACTIVATE WORK INC ↗
  • Who funds All In Empowering Futures Inc ↗
  • Who funds HOPE FOR HAITI'S CHILDREN MINISTRIES INCORPORATED ↗
  • Who funds Executives Partnering to Invest in Children (EPIC) ↗
  • Who funds Dream Makers Project Inc ↗
  • Who funds BEAUTIFUL REDEMPTION ↗

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.

Gary PhilanthropyCO17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Gary Philanthropy · The Anschutz Foundation · The Denver Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · Daniels Fund · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · El Pomar Foundation · The Colorado Health Foundation · Mile High United Way Inc · Servant Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

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 Gardner Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Gardner Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Gardner Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Gardner 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.

    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 Gardner Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph