Skip to content
Gorman Foundation Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Gorman Foundation Charitable Trust

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.

$22k
Granted FY2025still arriving
22
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$17k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Religion$30kHealth$8kPhilanthropy$7kEnvironment$6kEducation$6kFood & Nutrition$4kArts & Culture$3kHuman Services$3kOther$0
02FY2025 · 22 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k21 grants · $5k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $17k
$250
Median grant
4
States reached
$199k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Christ Episcopal Church Aspen$17,025
Aspen Valley Hospital Foundation$250
The Wetlands Initiative$250
University of Denver$250
Aspen Historical Society$250
Shirley Ryan Ability Lab$250
Mountain Rescue Aspen$250
Christ Church Winnetka$250
Aspen Community Foundation$250
Denver Rescue Mission$250
Challenge Aspen$250
The Blake Schools$250
Roaring Fork Outdoor Volunteers$250
Aspen Center for Physics$250
Independence Pass Foundation$250
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 (FY20–25, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 27% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Challenge Aspen: $250 → 6%Challenge Aspen: $250 → 6%Challenge Aspen: $250 → 6%Challenge Aspen: $250 → 6%Challenge Aspen: $100 → 6%North Shore Senior Center: $250 → 14%North Shore Senior Center: $150 → 14%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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$64k · 34 repeat orgs$4k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +25% since the first grant, against +15% for those funded once.

34 repeat relationships: 21 still active in FY2025, 13 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

34
18

Total granted

$64k
$4k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+25%
+15%

Still filing today

65%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthEducationHuman ServicesFood & NutritionEnvironmentPublic Safety & DisasterOther
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

  • MH
    Mercy Health Foundation
    5× · 2020–2024 · $3k · revenue +3%
  • FB
    FOOD BANK OF THE ROCKIES
    4× · 2020–2023 · $2k · revenue +23%
  • RF
    ROARING FORK CONSERVANCY
    6× · 2020–2025 · $2k · revenue +73%

Funded once

  • UW
    United Way
    one grant, 2020 · $500
  • VV
    Valley View Foundation
    one grant, 2022 · $500
  • WORLD BICYCLE RELIEF NFP
    one grant, 2021 · $300 · revenue +15%
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
Colorado Museum of Natural History

Be a catalyst! Ignite our community's passion for nature and science.

Arts & Culture
2
American Water Works Association

To promote public health, safety, and welfare through the improvement of the quality and quantity of drinking water and the development and furtherance of understanding of the problems relating thereto.

Public Benefit
3
Colorado Gives Foundation

We connect people, ideas, and nonprofits to make good happen. our vision is that all of jeffco is thriving.

Philanthropy
4
Mental Health Center of Boulder County Inc

Partnering to improve quality of life as a nonprofit organization dedicated to mental health and wellness. healing is our purpose, help is our promise, health is our passion.

—
5
The Water Research Foundation

The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…

Environment
6
American Society of Civil Engineers Inc

To provide essential value to our members, their careers, our partners, and the public, asce will: facilitate the advancement of technology; encourage and provide the tools for lifelong learning; promote professionalism and the profession;…

Science & Tech
7
American Gas Association

American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…

—
8
Regional West Health Services

Health care services for the people of western nebraska and eastern wyoming.

Health
9
Arbor Research Collaborative for Health

Arbor research collaborative for health is committed to improving patient care through research that shapes medical policies and practice. in particular, arbor research conducts health outcomes research on chronic disease and end-stage…

Health
10
The Rand Corporation

Help improve policy and decision making through research and analysis.

Public Benefit
11
Federation of State Medical Boards of the United States Inc

The fsmb serves as the voice for state medical boards, supporting them through education, assessment, research and advocacy while providing services and initiatives that promote patient safety, quality health care and regulatory best…

Health
12
National Opinion Research Center

See schedule onorc at the university of chicago conducts research and data science on critical societal issues to guide decision-making and the development of programs and public policy. our experts identify relationships and trends, and…

Social Science
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Robert R Mccormick Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago. 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

35 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 35 of the 54 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
33/35
Grantees still filing
28/35
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Christ Episcopal Church Aspen: $28,025 · OtherChrist Episcopal Church Aspen+34 more: $22,900 · Other+34 moreMercy Health Foundation: $2,750 · HealthRehabilitation Institute of Chicago: $1,250 · HealthASPEN VALLEY HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $500 · HealthTHE JOSSELYN CENTER NFP: $350 · HealthAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $250 · HealthALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $250 · HealthAmerican Heart Association Inc: $250 · HealthILLINOIS WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY: $1,500 · EducationTHE BLAKE SCHOOL: $1,400 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF DENVER: $1,250 · EducationASPEN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $2,500 · PhilanthropyROBERT R MCCORMICK FOUNDATION: $1,500 · PhilanthropyFOOD BANK OF THE ROCKIES: $2,000 · Food & NutritionGREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY: $1,200 · Food & NutritionROARING FORK CONSERVANCY: $1,900 · EnvironmentTHE WETLANDS INITIATIVE: $650 · EnvironmentCHALLENGE ASPEN: $1,100 · Human ServicesDENVER RESCUE MISSION: $500 · Human ServicesNORTH SHORE SENIOR CENTER: $400 · Human Services
Other$50,925Health$5,600Education$4,150Philanthropy$4,000Food & Nutrition$3,200Environment$2,550Human Services$2,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMercy Health Foundation: $2,750 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetASPEN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $2,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetFOOD BANK OF THE ROCKIES: $2,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetROARING FORK CONSERVANCY: $1,900 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetMountain Rescue Aspen Inc: $1,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetROBERT R MCCORMICK FOUNDATION: $1,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetILLINOIS WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY: $1,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetUNITED WAY BATTLEMENT TO THE BELLS: $1,500 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetINDEPENDENCE PASS FOUNDATION: $1,450 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetTHE BLAKE SCHOOL: $1,400 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetASPEN HISTORICAL SOCIETY: $1,400 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetRoaring Fork Outdoor Volunteers: $1,350 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetRehabilitation Institute of Chicago: $1,250 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF DENVER: $1,250 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetAspen Journalism: $1,250 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetGREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY: $1,200 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCHALLENGE ASPEN: $1,100 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICARES FOUNDATION INC: $750 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE WETLANDS INITIATIVE: $650 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetDENVER RESCUE MISSION: $500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetASPEN CENTER FOR PHYSICS: $500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetASPEN VALLEY HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNORTH SHORE SENIOR CENTER: $400 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE VOLUNTEER CENTER: $400 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetTHE JOSSELYN CENTER NFP: $350 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWORLD BICYCLE RELIEF NFP: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAspen Deserves Better: $250 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetMCALLISTER FOUNDATION: $250 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetChicago Youth Centers: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOUNSELING CENTER OF THE NORTH SHORE INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% 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 Mercy Health Foundation ↗
  • Who funds ASPEN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds FOOD BANK OF THE ROCKIES ↗
  • Who funds ROARING FORK CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds Mountain Rescue Aspen Inc ↗
  • Who funds ROBERT R MCCORMICK FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds ILLINOIS WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds UNITED WAY BATTLEMENT TO THE BELLS ↗
  • Who funds INDEPENDENCE PASS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE BLAKE SCHOOL ↗
  • Who funds ASPEN HISTORICAL SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds Roaring Fork Outdoor Volunteers ↗
  • Who funds Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF DENVER ↗
  • Who funds Aspen Journalism ↗
  • Who funds GREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY ↗
  • Who funds CHALLENGE ASPEN ↗
  • Who funds AMERICARES FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds THE WETLANDS INITIATIVE ↗
  • Who funds DENVER RESCUE MISSION ↗
  • Who funds ASPEN CENTER FOR PHYSICS ↗
  • Who funds ASPEN VALLEY HOSPITAL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds NORTH SHORE SENIOR CENTER ↗
  • Who funds THE VOLUNTEER CENTER ↗
  • Who funds THE JOSSELYN CENTER NFP ↗
  • Who funds WORLD BICYCLE RELIEF NFP ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION ↗

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.

Nm Morris Family Foun…Alpenglow FoundationBrady FoundationAspen Community Found…Arches FoundationKemper Educational an…Colorado Gives Founda…The Chicago Community…Ruth a Carver Foundat…Susan and Stephen Bai…Aspen Business Center…John & Jacolyn Bucksb…
Nm Morris Family FoundationNY17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 10 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Nm Morris Family Foundation · Alpenglow Foundation · Brady Foundation · Aspen Community Foundation · Arches Foundation · Kemper Educational and Charitable Fund · Colorado Gives Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · Ruth a Carver Foundation · Susan and Stephen Baird Family Foundation C/O Stephen W Baird · Aspen Business Center Foundation · John & Jacolyn Bucksbaum Family Found

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Americares Foundation Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
10report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
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 54 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 Gorman’s 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