· Private foundation
Grand Park Community Foundation
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.
Read this first · the figures below need context
68% of Grand Park Community Foundation’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Columbine Community Foundation, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 4 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2022, the last year Grand Park Community Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 6 organizations, $51k. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
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 · FY2022
- Under $10k8 grants · $18k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $33k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Headwaters Trail Alliance | $20,000 |
| Grand Foundation | $12,500 |
| Middle Park Medical Foundation | $7,500 |
| Fraser Valley Recreation Foundation | $3,000 |
| Grand County Pet Pals | $2,000 |
| Mountain Family Center | $1,950 |
| Grand Kids Learning Center | $1,500 |
| Winter Park Horseman's Association | $1,200 |
| Grand County Historical Association | $1,000 |
| Lions Club Foundation | $300 |
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 (FY17–19, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
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.
10 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2022, 2 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call). Read against FY2022, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
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, 66% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7k 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
- MPMIDDLE PARK MEDICAL FOUNDATION6× · 2019–2024 · $25k · revenue +825%
- GCGrand County Historical Association5× · 2019–2024 · $16k · revenue +50%
- FVFRASER VALLEY RECREATION FOUNDATION5× · 2017–2023 · $12k · revenue ×20 · 75% of their budget
Funded once
- FVFRASER VALLEY HOCKEY ASSOCIATIONgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +59%
- WPWINTER PARK SKI EDUCATION FOUNDATIONone grant, 2019 · $2k · revenue -62%
- YLYOUNG LIFEgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $2k · revenue +38%
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.
Community Recreational Facility
It is the mission of the grand huts association (gha) to provide a backcountry recreational hut system in the forests of grand county. gha will work to open for public use cabins already in existence on public and private lands, and to…
To provide the youth of summit county with a well-balanced ski racing program including fitness, self-esteem, and character building through training and competition within a nurturing environment. the club will educate our youth about…
Non-profit support for the Grand County Library District
To coordinate, manage, and colsolidate the comprehensive water quality monitoring, informational, and educational programs in grand county, colorado.
Engage in wildfire prevention, preparedness, mitigation, and survival through collaboration, education, and action.Vision = Provide a collaborative network that connects community members, land, resource, and infrastructure manageers,…
Organization raises money and makes contributions to the Grand County Colorado Library System which consists of 5 branch libraries. This is an ongoing year around activity.
The mission of the Gunnison Sportsmen's Association is to provide and promote a safe shooting facility for all types of shooting spots for Association members and the Gunnison Community.
Grand mesa nordic council (gmnc) is a community-supported, nonprofit organization dedicated to promoting fun and safe cross country skiing experiences on grand mesa for skiers of all ages and abilities.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Fraser Valley Recreation Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Winter Park-Fraser Valley Rotary Foundation Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
16 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. 16 of the 31 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 Columbine Community Foundation ↗
- Who funds MIDDLE PARK MEDICAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Grand County Historical Association ↗
- Who funds FRASER VALLEY RECREATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Winter Park Horseman's Association ↗
- Who funds FRASER VALLEY HOCKEY ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds GRAND COUNTY PET PALS INC ↗
- Who funds MOUNTAIN FAMILY CENTER ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL SPORTS CENTER FOR THE DISABLED INC ↗
- Who funds Winter Park-Fraser Valley Rotary Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds WINTER PARK SKI EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds YOUNG LIFE ↗
- Who funds GRAND COUNTY SEARCH & RESCUE ↗
- Who funds NORTHWEST ROCKY MOUNTAIN CASA ↗
- Who funds GRAND CONCERTS INC ↗
- Who funds NORTHWEST COLORADO VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION ↗
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: Colorado Gives Foundation · Rendezvous Foundation Inc · El Pomar Foundation · Menhennett Foundation · Pilling Family Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Grand Park Community Foundation 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Grand Park Community Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Grand Park Community 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.