Skip to content
Gazette Charities at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Gazette Charities

The GAZETTE CHARITIES conducts charitable activities in the colorado springs, colorado metropolitan area to provide grants and direct/indirect support to social services and other service organizations in the colorado springs area.

$1.4M
Granted FY2025still arriving
21
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$94k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Human Services$5.4MHealth$1.5MHousing & Shelter$950kFood & Nutrition$944kEducation$500kPublic Safety & Disaster$339kReligion$323kPhilanthropy$173kOther$0
02FY2025 · 21 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $128k
  • $50k–250k18 grants · $1.3M
$66,942
Median grant
1
States reached
$116k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PEAK VISTA COMMUNITY HEALTH CARE$93,718
CARE AND SHARE FOOD BANK$93,718
CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF CENTRAL COLOR$83,677
COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILD DEV$80,330
YMCA OF THE PIKES PEAK REGION$80,330
SILVER KEY SENIOR SERVICES$73,635
SALVATION ARMY$73,635
TRI-LAKES CARES$73,635
LUTHERAN FAMILY SERVICES$73,635
RESOURCE EXCHANGE INC$73,635
PIKES PEAK HOSPICE AND PALLIATIVE C$66,942
WESTSIDE CARES$60,247
MERCY'S GATE$60,247
PARTNERS IN HOUSING$56,900
MT CARMEL VETERANS SERVICE CENTER$53,554
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 (FY17–25, $2.9M) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%THE PLACE: $75k → 9%THE PLACE: $74k → 9%THE PLACE: $57k → 9%THE PLACE: $54k → 9%Urban Peak: $52k → 9%THE PLACE: $52k → 9%Urban Peak: $50k → 9%Resource Exchange Inc: $32k → 9%Resource Exchange Inc: $30k → 9%Silver Key Senior Services: $57k → 9%Silver Key Senior Services: $55k → 9%RESOURCE EXCHANGE INC: $74k → 9%THE RESOURCE EXCHANGE: $68k → 9%THE RESOURCE EXCHANGE: $67k → 9%THE RESOURCE EXCHANGE: $63k → 9%THE RESOURCE EXCHANGE: $51k → 9%THE RESOURCE EXCHANGE: $34k → 9%THE RESOURCE EXCHANGE: $33k → 9%MERCY'S GATE: $66k → 9%Armed Services YMCA (SE YMCA): $64k → 9%MERCY'S GATE: $61k → 9%MERCY'S GATE: $60k → 9%MERCY'S GATE: $59k → 9%MERCY'S GATE: $55k → 9%TESSA: $64k → 9%TESSA: $55k → 9%TESSA: $54k → 9%TESSA: $52k → 9%TESSA: $51k → 9%TRI-LAKES CARES: $74k → 9%TRI-LAKES CARES: $72k → 9%TRI-LAKES CARES: $71k → 9%TRI-LAKES CARES: $69k → 9%TRI-LAKES CARES: $55k → 9%TRI-LAKES CARES: $31k → 9%TRI-LAKES CARES: $30k → 9%Tri Lakes Care: $29k → 9%Tri Lakes Care: $28k → 9%SILVER KEY SENIOR SERVICES: $82k → 9%SILVER KEY SENIOR SERVICES: $74k → 9%SILVER KEY SENIOR SERVICES: $72k → 9%ARMED SERVICES YMCA: $69k → 9%SILVER KEY SENIOR SERVICES: $69k → 9%ARMED SERVICES YMCA: $68k → 9%Armed Services YMCA: $66k → 9%SILVER KEY SENIOR SERVICES: $64k → 9%SILVER KEY SENIOR SERVICES: $60k → 9%SILVER KEY SENIOR SERVICES: $59k → 9%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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$10M · 26 repeat orgs$158k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +46% since the first grant, against -97% for those funded once.

26 repeat relationships: 20 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

26
2

Total granted

$10M
$118k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+46%
-97%

Still filing today

77%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $40k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHealthHousing & ShelterFood & NutritionEducationEmploymentOther
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

  • Care and Share Inc
    9× · 2017–2025 · $944k · revenue +45%
  • PV
    PEAK VISTA COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS
    9× · 2017–2025 · $885k · revenue +28%
  • SILVER KEY SENIOR SERVICES INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $590k · revenue +120%

Funded once

  • RP
    REACH PIKES PEAK
    one grant, 2017 · $69k · revenue -97%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2020 · $49k
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
Safehouse Denver Inc

Safehouse denver assists adult, children, and youth in reclaiming their right to a life free from domestic violence. the agency provides a broad spectrum of culturally competent, trauma-informed services, including but not limited to,…

Human Services
2
Safehouse Progressive Alliance for Nonviolence Inc

To provide safe shelter, support and advocacy for adults and their children, and to provide an end to violence against adults, youth and children through support, advocacy and community organizing.

Human Services
3
Summitstone Health Partners

SummitStone provides comprehensive behavioral health services across all care levels: 24/7 crisis services, inpatient and outpatient treatment, housing, residential care, and peer support. We partner with law enforcement, schools, and…

Health
4
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
5
Mount St Vincent Home Inc

As part of intermountain health, mount saint vincent partners with children and families to heal beyond trauma into a healthy and hopeful future.

—
6
Rocky Mountain Human Services

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.

Human Services
7
Hilltop Health Services Corporation

Hilltop community resources is dedicated to building a community where everyone belongs. our tailored programs address the unique needs of individuals and families, from behavioral health support and intimate partner violence services to…

Health
8
Metropolitan Denver Homeless Initiative Inc

Mission: leading and advancing collaboration to end homelessness in our region. vision: dedicated to everyone in the metro region having a safe, stable place to call home. values: committed to core values that bring people home: -…

Housing & Shelter
9
Mental Health Center of Denver

We empower people to overcome barriers and achieve lasting well-being through collaborative behavioral health care and comprehensive support.

Health
10
Colorado Mental Wellness Network

To empower Coloradans affected by mental health conditions and providing them with skills and tools necessary to achieve their personal wellness goal.

Health
11
Community Health Partnership (Chp)

Community health partnership (chp) was founded in 1992 as a collaborative effort focused on improving coordination between local health care providers. over the decades, the organization's work has expanded in response to community needs.…

Health
12
Cornerstone Montgomery

Empowering people living with mental health and substance use disorders to thrive in their community through collaboration, treatment, education and advocacy.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Place; the most unlike its peers is Colorado Springs Ecumenical Social Ministries Inc. 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

22 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. 22 of the 29 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/22
Grantees still filing
16/22
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF CENTRAL COLORADO INC: $693,872 · OtherCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF CENTRAL COLORADO IN…SALVATION ARMY: $590,091 · OtherSALVATION ARMYLUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF COLORADO: $463,275 · OtherLUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF COLORADOPIKES PEAK HOSPICE AND PALLIATIVE CARE INC: $396,225 · OtherPIKES PEAK HOSPICE AND PALLIATIVE CARE IN…WESTSIDE CARES INC: $371,718 · OtherWESTSIDE CARES INCAMERICAN RED CROSS: $338,873 · OtherAMERICAN RED CROSSCOLORADO SPRINGS ECUMENICAL SOCIAL MINISTRIES INC: $323,098 · OtherCOLORADO SPRINGS ECUMENICAL SOCIAL MINIST…GRIFFITH CENTERS FOR CHILDREN FOUNDATION INC: $172,714 · Other+7 more: $478,908 · Other+7 moreYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF THE PIKES PEAK REGION: $656,338 · Human ServicesYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF…SILVER KEY SENIOR SERVICES INC: $590,004 · Human ServicesSILVER KEY SENIOR SERVICES INCTRI-LAKES CARES: $459,461 · Human ServicesTRI-LAKES CARESTHE RESOURCE EXCHANGE INC: $450,944 · Human ServicesTHE RESOURCE EXCHANGE INCThe Place: $414,528 · Human ServicesThe PlaceMercy's Gate: $377,932 · Human ServicesMercy's GateTESSA: $366,656 · Human ServicesTESSAPEAK VISTA COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS: $885,161 · HealthPEAK VISTA …NAMI National: $178,665 · HealthNAMI Nation…Care and Share Inc: $943,953 · Food & NutritionCare and S…Partners in Housing Inc: $426,474 · Housing & ShelterURBAN PEAK DENVER: $108,884 · Housing & ShelterCommunity Partnership for Child Development: $500,442 · EducationMT CARMEL VETERANS SERVICE CENTER: $233,823 · Employment
Other$3,828,774Human Services$3,315,863Health$1,063,826Food & Nutrition$943,953Housing & Shelter$535,358Education$500,442Employment$233,823

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 budgetCare and Share Inc: $943,953 over 9y, 0.3% of budgetPEAK VISTA COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS: $885,161 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF THE PIKES PEAK REGION: $656,338 over 9y, 0.4% of budgetSILVER KEY SENIOR SERVICES INC: $590,004 over 9y, 1.0% of budgetCommunity Partnership for Child Development: $500,442 over 9y, 0.4% of budgetLUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF COLORADO: $463,275 over 9y, 0.4% of budgetTRI-LAKES CARES: $459,461 over 9y, 3.1% of budgetTHE RESOURCE EXCHANGE INC: $450,944 over 9y, 0.3% of budgetPartners in Housing Inc: $426,474 over 9y, 2.5% of budgetThe Place: $414,528 over 7y, 3.3% of budgetPIKES PEAK HOSPICE AND PALLIATIVE CARE INC: $396,225 over 8y, 0.6% of budgetMercy's Gate: $377,932 over 9y, 4.0% of budgetWESTSIDE CARES INC: $371,718 over 9y, 3.4% of budgetTESSA: $366,656 over 9y, 2.0% of budgetCOLORADO SPRINGS ECUMENICAL SOCIAL MINISTRIES INC: $323,098 over 4y, 6.3% of budgetMT CARMEL VETERANS SERVICE CENTER: $233,823 over 5y, 1.5% of budgetNAMI National: $178,665 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetURBAN PEAK DENVER: $108,884 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetThe Home Front Cares Inc: $90,675 over 4y, 4.9% of budgetCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER FOR THE PIKES PEAK REGION INC: $72,083 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetREACH PIKES PEAK: $68,861 over 1y, 9.7% 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 Care and Share Inc ↗
  • Who funds PEAK VISTA COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS ↗
  • Who funds YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF THE PIKES PEAK REGION ↗
  • Who funds SILVER KEY SENIOR SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds Community Partnership for Child Development ↗
  • Who funds LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF COLORADO ↗
  • Who funds TRI-LAKES CARES ↗
  • Who funds THE RESOURCE EXCHANGE INC ↗
  • Who funds Partners in Housing Inc ↗
  • Who funds The Place ↗
  • Who funds PIKES PEAK HOSPICE AND PALLIATIVE CARE INC ↗
  • Who funds Mercy's Gate ↗
  • Who funds WESTSIDE CARES INC ↗
  • Who funds TESSA ↗
  • Who funds COLORADO SPRINGS ECUMENICAL SOCIAL MINISTRIES INC ↗
  • Who funds MT CARMEL VETERANS SERVICE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds NAMI National ↗
  • Who funds GRIFFITH CENTERS FOR CHILDREN FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds URBAN PEAK DENVER ↗
  • Who funds The Home Front Cares Inc ↗
  • Who funds CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER FOR THE PIKES PEAK REGION INC ↗
  • Who funds REACH PIKES PEAK ↗

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.

Pikes Peak Community …El Pomar FoundationColorado Springs Heal…Pikes Peak United WayThe Joseph Henry Edmo…Jerome V Bruni Founda…The Myron Stratton Ho…Colorado Gives Founda…The Marson FoundationThe Hester E & Edwin …Mile High United Way …The Colorado Health F…
Pikes Peak Community FoundationCO40.5× affinity17 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Pikes Peak Community Foundation · El Pomar Foundation · Colorado Springs Health Foundation · Pikes Peak United Way · The Joseph Henry Edmondson Foundation · Jerome V Bruni Foundation · The Myron Stratton Home · Colorado Gives Foundation · The Marson Foundation · The Hester E & Edwin W Giddings Foundation · Mile High United Way Inc · The Colorado Health 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 Gazette Charities funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Gazette Charities. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    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 Gazette Charities?

    Find your warmest path to Gazette Charities 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 29 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 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 Gazette Charities’ 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