· Private foundation
Grace Family Foundation Inc
Its FY2024 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 FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k6 grants · $27k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $35k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $60k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| DENVER SCHOOL OF THE ARTS FRIENDS FOUNDATION | $60,000 |
| ARROYO SECO LIVE INC | $15,000 |
| HOLY TRINITY CHURCH | $10,000 |
| DENVER PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| THE NATURE CONSERVANCY IN COLORADO | $5,000 |
| INDY YOGA MOVEMENT INC | $5,000 |
| FROM THE HEART PRODUCTIONS INC | $5,000 |
| MISSIONARY ENTERPRISES INC | $5,000 |
| NATIONAL ALLIANCE ON MENTAL ILLNESS | $5,000 |
| THE PLAYERS PHILANTHROPY FUND INC | $2,000 |
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 (FY18–24, $52k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 57% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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 +48% since the first grant, against +35% for the ones you funded once.
35 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2024, 29 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k 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
Culver Educational Foundation6× · 2017–2022 · $75k · revenue +73%
MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC5× · 2018–2023 · $50k · revenue +89%
SANIBEL-CAPTIVA CONSERVATION FOUNDATION6× · 2018–2023 · $49k · revenue +143%
Funded once
- EEIYUone grant, 2020 · $25k
- IAINDIANAPOLIS ART CENTER INCgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue +143%
- IIIAYV Incone grant, 2020 · $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.
Guided by artists, rooted in new mexico, site santa fe celebrates contemporary creative expression.
Provide opportunities for children and adults to participate in outdoor field-oriented education in natural science programs.
Inspire people to enjoy and protect birds through recreation, education, conservation, and restoration of the environment, upon which we all depend.
The organization was formed in 1987. Its mission is "supporting land, food, water, and the cultures" of the people of northern New Mexico through the design and implementation of community and economic development programs and projects.
Nature and culture international conserves biologically diverse landscapes in latin america, in concert with local cultures, for the well-being of the planet.
Cuenca los ojos works to preserve and restore the biodiversity of the us/mexican borderlands through land protection, habitat restoration and wildlife reintroduction.
Rocky mountain wild works to protect, connect, and restore wildlife and wild lands in the southern rocky mountain region. we work to secure the biodiversity of the mountains, plains, and desert ecosystems of colorado, wyoming, utah, and…
Advance the well- being of mountain people and conservation of mountain environments.
Be a catalyst! Ignite our community's passion for nature and science.
The organization operates exclusively for the benefit and support of animal protection new mexico, which seeks to educate the public about and advocates campaigns that prevent cruelty to animals.
Rocky Mountain Field Institute conserves and protects public lands in Southern Colorado through volunteer-based trail and restoration projects, environmental education, and restoration research.
To conserve and steward the open lands and natural character of the headwaters of the colorado river in partnership with the local community.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Taos Community Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Paul Sherwen Project Inc. 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 28 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) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% 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.
57 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. 57 of the 106 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 Culver Educational Foundation ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds SANIBEL-CAPTIVA CONSERVATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds The Harwood Museum Alliance Inc ↗
- Who funds MISSIONARY ENTERPRISES INC ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds FISH OF SANIBEL-CAPTIVA INC ↗
- Who funds THE TAOS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds TAOS LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds INDIANAPOLIS ART CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Lake Maxinkuckee Environmental Fund Inc ↗
- Who funds IAYV Inc ↗
- Who funds From The Heart Productions ↗
- Who funds Davis Contemporary Dance Company ↗
- Who funds INDY YOGA MOVEMENT ↗
- Who funds BARRIER ISLAND GROUP FOR THE ARTS ↗
- Who funds The Paseo Project Inc ↗
- Who funds THE CORAL REEF ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds POLAR BEARS INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds LAKE MAXINKUCKEE ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds DENVER PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Golden Willow Retreat 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: The Taos Community Foundation Inc · Lor Foundation Inc · Reed Family Foundation Inc · Planet in Peace Foundation · Los Alamos National Laboratory Foundation · The Moore Charitable Foundation Inc · Marshall L and Perrine D McCune Charitable Foundation Inc · Santa Fe Community Foundation · JF Maddox Foundation · New Mexico Community Foundation · Budd Family Foundation · Robert T Keeler Foundation
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 Grace Family Foundation Inc 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Bridge House Inc — 88% of income from government
- Sanibel-Captiva Conservation Foundation — 4% 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.