· Private foundation
Joseph and Loretta Law Foundation
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $5k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $92k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| GLOBAL DOWN SYNDROME FOUNDATION | $32,000 |
| DENVER FILM SOCIETY | $20,000 |
| DENVER STREET SCHOOL | $10,000 |
| SERIESFEST | $10,000 |
| FREEDOM SERVICE DOGS | $10,000 |
| TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| WOODSON CENTER | $5,000 |
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 (FY17–25, $91k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 86% 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 19% of Joseph and Loretta Law Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 35% of the giving stays in CO; read by stated purpose it is 28% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
7 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 64% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $35k 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
- HOHOSPICE OF METRO DENVER INC2× · 2021–2023 · $71k · revenue -2%
- GDGLOBAL DOWN SYNDROME FOUNDATION3× · 2017–2025 · $49k · revenue -7%
- TDTHE DENVER STREET SCHOOL5× · 2020–2025 · $39k · revenue -1%
Funded once
- DADENVER ART MUSEUMgraduatedone grant, 2024 · $80k · revenue +107%
- AOARCHDIOCESE OF DENVERone grant, 2024 · $50k
- GVGreenwood Village Police Foundationone grant, 2023 · $30k · revenue -82% · 64% of their budget
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.
The nstmf's mission is to build inclusive stem communities across the united states. fundamental to these communities are the significant, inspirational connections we foster between the individuals who have received national recognition…
Denver scholarship foundation (dsf) inspires and empowers denver public schools (dps) students to enroll in and graduate from postsecondary institutions of higher education by providing the tools, knowledge, and financial resources for…
Inspiring communities to save wildlife for future generations.
Our mission is to break down barriers to als research to find effective treatments. by uniting academia, the pharma and biotech industry, government, venture capital, related nonprofits, and the als community, we aim to overcome the…
Future problem solving proudly celebrates more than 50 years of placing close to a million young people at the core of a dynamic, purposeful learning experience. each year k-12 students from around the world participate in a variety of…
Susan g. komen 's mission is to save lives by meeting the most critical needs in our communities & investing in breakthrough research to prevent & cure breast cancer.
Nyu is a private university with approximately 60,000 matriculating students in 20 schools and institutes. nyu's primary missions are education, research and scholarship, and patient care.
Sanford burnham prebys medical discovery institute's mission is to advance the biomedical sciences by cultivating the next generation of scientific leaders, providing meaningful opportunities for researchers of all backgrounds to learn,…
The mission of the lung cancer research foundation is to improve lung cancer outcomes by funding research for the prevention, diagnosis, treatment and cure of lung cancer.
Operate a state-of-the-art, world-class genomic research center that creates and uses advanced genomics to understand the genetic basis of disease. for more information, see schedule o.
Please see schedule o
Susan g. komen has an unmatched, comprehensive 360-degree approach to fighting breast cancer across all fronts and supporting millions of people in the u.s. and in countries worldwide. we advocate for policies to protect patients, drive…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Colorado Uplift Inc and the most unlike its peers is Greenwood Village Police Foundation. 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 33 years old; the field is 19. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 9% 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.
25 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
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 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 25 of the 28 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 TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA ↗
- Who funds DENVER ART MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds HOSPICE OF METRO DENVER INC ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL DOWN SYNDROME FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE DENVER STREET SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds Greenwood Village Police Foundation ↗
- Who funds SERIESFEST ↗
- Who funds STEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds DENVER FILM SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds Nathan Yip Foundation ↗
- Who funds ALLIANCE FOR CHOICE IN EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds FREEDOM SERVICE DOGS INC ↗
- Who funds CANCER LEAGUE OF COLORADO INC ↗
- Who funds ROOM TO READ ↗
- Who funds WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds SHE-CAN GLOBAL INC ↗
- Who funds WOODSON CENTER ↗
- Who funds THE FOUNDATION FIGHTING BLINDNESS INC ↗
- Who funds HOPE'S PROMISE INC ↗
- Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND COLLEGE PARK FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SUMMER SCHOLARS ↗
- Who funds BUILDON INC ↗
- Who funds COLORADO UPLIFT INC ↗
- Who funds JOHN LESTER FOUNDATION ↗
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 Denver Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · Mile High United Way Inc · The Anna and John J Sie Foundation · The Chotin Family Foundation · Rose Community Foundation · The Colorado Health Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc
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 Joseph and Loretta Law 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.
- Wounded Warrior Project Inc — 0% 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Joseph and Loretta Law Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Joseph and Loretta Law 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.