Skip to content
High Hopes Colorado at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

High Hopes Colorado

HIGH HOPES COLORADO was organized to promote and defend systems, institutions, policies, programs and people dedicated to free markets, free enterprise, restrained and efficient government, an educated populace, and a general climate dedicated to economic growth and prosperity.

$150k
Granted FY2023
1
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$150k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2023.

Public Benefit$3.0MEducation$80kSocial Science$12k
02FY2023 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$150,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$442k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ADVANCE COLORADO$150,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 13% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%TEACH FOR AMERICA: $75k → 17%ADVANCE COLORADO: $150k → 8%THE WESTERN WAY: $245k → 12%AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY FOUNDATION: $74k → 7%COMMON SENSE POLICY ROUNDTABLE: $12k → 8%THE WESTERN WAY: $70k → 12%AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY FOUNDATION: $15k → 7%ADVANCE COLORADO: $250k → 8%COLORADO OPPORTUNITY FOUNDATION: $1.5M → 8%COLORADO OPPORTUNITY FOUNDATION: $700k → 8%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.
$2.9M · 3 repeat orgs$181k to everyone else

3 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2023, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
5

Total granted

$2.9M
$181k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+133%
+289%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’23
EducationSocial ScienceCivil RightsPublic BenefitEnvironmentCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • CO
    COLORADO OPPORTUNITY FOUNDATION
    2× · 2020–2021 · $2.2M · revenue -54% · 73% of their budget
  • AC
    ADVANCE COLORADO
    2× · 2021–2023 · $400k · revenue +472% · 25% of their budget
  • TW
    The Western Way Organization
    2× · 2017–2018 · $315k · revenue +133% · 87% of their budget

Funded once

  • Teach for America Inc
    one grant, 2018 · $75k · revenue +1%
  • AF
    Americans for Prosperity Foundation
    one grant, 2018 · $74k · revenue -75%
  • AF
    AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITYgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $15k · revenue +289%
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 Rising State Action

The organization is focused on holding special interest networks accountable and advancing conservative principles. We're fighting for limited government, lowering taxes, fighting government over-regulation that stifles freedom, free…

—
2
Protect Colorados Vote

To oppose a colorado statewide ballot initiative to join the national popular vote compact

—
3
Defend Colorado

The mission of the organization is to conduct research and analysis of conditions affecting the Colorado state economy and promote policies that strengthen the state economy.

—
4
Unite for Colorado

To promote the common good and general welfare of americans by promoting public policy that strengthens the economy, promotes job growth, and supports fair and reasonable business regulations.

—
5
Us - China Policy Foundation
—
6
Education Commission of the States

The mission of education commission of the states is to advocate for attaining educational excellence for all and to help state leaders identify, develop and implement public policy for education that addresses current and future needs of…

Education
7
Colorado Fiscal Institute

To provide timely, credible and accessible analyses of fiscal and economic issues facing colorado to inform public policy debates and promote economic prosperity

Community Improvement
8
American Policy Coalition

With a commitment to free market principles, APC focuses on educating the public about conservative fiscal policies that foster job growth, a stronger economy, and increased opportunity for all Americans.

Public Benefit
9
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research

The american enterprise institute is a community of scholars and supporters committed to expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity, and strengthening free enterprise. aei pursues these ideals through independent thinking and the…

Social Science
10
Aia Colorado

AIA Colorado,is the voice of the architecture profession in Colorado. Through advocacy, leadership development, education and resources for architects, the organization supports architecture professionals in designing a better world where…

—
11
Coloradans for Progress

To research and distribute information to citizens concerning the general affordability of life, of the economy, and of the environment and advocating for workers and a strong jobs market in colorado.

—
12
Colorado Association of School Executives

Empower colorado education leaders through advocacy, professional learning and networking to deliver on the promise of public education

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Americans for Prosperity Foundation; the most unlike its peers is The Western Way Organization. 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

8 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COLORADO OPPORTUNITY FOUNDATION: $2,195,000 · Civil RightsCOLORADO OPPORTUNITY FOUNDATIONADVANCE COLORADO: $400,000 · Public BenefitADVANCE COLORA…The Western Way Organization: $315,000 · EnvironmentThe Western…Americans for Prosperity Foundation: $74,000 · Social ScienceCOMMON SENSE INSTITUTE: $11,697 · Social ScienceTeach for America Inc: $75,000 · EducationJEFFERSON COUNTY STUDENTS FIRST: $5,000 · EducationAMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY: $15,000 · Community Improvement
Civil Rights$2,195,000Public Benefit$400,000Environment$315,000Social Science$85,697Education$80,000Community Improvement$15,000

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 budgetCOLORADO OPPORTUNITY FOUNDATION: $2,195,000 over 2y, 73% of budgetADVANCE COLORADO: $400,000 over 2y, 25% of budgetThe Western Way Organization: $315,000 over 2y, 87% of budgetTeach for America Inc: $75,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAmericans for Prosperity Foundation: $74,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetAMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEFFERSON COUNTY STUDENTS FIRST: $5,000 over 1y, 36% 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.

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.

National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …
National Philanthropic TrustPA8.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 High Hopes Colorado funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from High Hopes Colorado. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 High Hopes Colorado?

    Find your warmest path to High Hopes Colorado 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 8 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on High Hopes Colorado’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