· Private foundation
Leatherwood 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
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 56% of LEATHERWOOD FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k19 grants · $29k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $173k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| 20 MOVES DONOR ADVISED FUND | $86,567 |
| LEATHERWOOD FOUNDATION DONOR ADVISED FUND | $86,566 |
| NORTHWEST FLORIDA BALLET INC | $5,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO OFFICE OF ADVANCEMENT | $5,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD | $3,000 |
| NATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS | $3,000 |
| ALAQUA ANIMAL REFUGE INC | $2,000 |
| ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC | $2,000 |
| WARRIOR CANINE CONNECTION | $1,000 |
| MARY MCDOWELL FRIENDS SCHOOL FUND | $1,000 |
| DISCALCED INC | $1,000 |
| LI FRAUMENI SYNDROME ASSOCIATION | $1,000 |
| CONSERVATION FLORIDA INC | $1,000 |
| SHELTER HOUSE INC | $500 |
| COLORADO OPEN LANDS | $500 |
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 (FY20–25, $57k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 60% 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.
56 repeat relationships — 19 still active in FY2025, 37 since wound down; 2 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, 14% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $173k 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
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc4× · 2020–2023 · $43k · revenue +73%- RMROCKY MOUNTAIN PLANNED PARENTHOOD INC6× · 2020–2025 · $32k · revenue +20%
- MVMESA VERDE FOUNDATION6× · 2020–2025 · $28k · revenue +5%
Funded once
- TUTHE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADOone grant, 2023 · $11k
- CCCORNELL COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SULLIone grant, 2023 · $10k
- UOUNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $8k · revenue +76%
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.
To provide meaningful access to high quality, civil legal services in the pursuit of justice for as many low income persons and members of vulnerable populations throughout colorado as possible.
The mission of the colorado coalition for the homeless is to work collaboratively toward the prevention of homelessness and the creation of lasting solutions for families, children, and individuals who are experiencing or at-risk of…
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…
We connect people, ideas, and nonprofits to make good happen. our vision is that all of jeffco is thriving.
The mission of the montana land reliance (mlr) is to partner with landowners to provide permanent protection for private lands that are significant for agricultural production, fish and wildlife habitat, and open space.
Be a catalyst! Ignite our community's passion for nature and science.
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.
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…
Greater yellowstone coalition works with all people to protect the lands, waters, and wildlife of the greater yellowstone ecosystem, now and for future generations.
Mountain area land trust's mission is to save natural areas, wildlife habitat, streams and rivers, working ranches and historic lands, for the benefit of the community and as a legacy for future generations.
The mission of denver botanic gardens is to connect people with plants, especially plants from the rocky mountain region and similar regions around the world, providing delight and enlightenment to everyone.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Denver Dumb Friends League and the most unlike its peers is Mesa Verde 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 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% 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 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.
54 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. 54 of the 88 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 Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc ↗
- Who funds THE WOODEN FLOOR FOR YOUTH MOVEMENT ↗
- Who funds ROCKY MOUNTAIN PLANNED PARENTHOOD INC ↗
- Who funds MESA VERDE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ROCKING THE BOAT INC ↗
- Who funds HUNTSMAN CANCER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds DENVER DUMB FRIENDS LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds Li Fraumeni Syndrome Association Inc ↗
- Who funds FOOD BANK OF THE ROCKIES ↗
- Who funds THE ELEPHANT SANCTUARY IN TENNESSEE ↗
- Who funds COLORADO OPEN LANDS ↗
- Who funds THE WILD ANIMAL SANCTUARY ↗
- Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF METRO DENVER INC ↗
- Who funds FAMILY PROMISE OF GREATER DENVER INC ↗
- Who funds DENVER CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER ↗
- Who funds WARRIOR CANINE CONNECTION INC ↗
- Who funds SAFEHOUSE DENVER INC ↗
- Who funds CASTING FOR RECOVERY ↗
- Who funds AUSBON SARGENT LAND PRESERVATION TRUST ↗
- Who funds NORTHWEST FLORIDA BALLET INC ↗
- Who funds COMEBACK YOGA ↗
- Who funds CURRAN EVENTS INC ↗
- Who funds HOMES FOR OUR TROOPS INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE DELORES PROJECT ↗
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 · The Denver Foundation · The Colorado Health Foundation · Schlessman Foundation Inc · The Anschutz Foundation · The Janus Henderson Foundation · Xcel Energy Foundation · Rose Community Foundation · Hill Foundation Wells Fargo Bank Na · Anschutz Family Foundation · Mile High United Way Inc · The Bank of America Charitable 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 Leatherwood 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — 7% of income from government
- Warrior Canine Connection Inc — 5% of income from government
- Sea Turtle Conservancy — 1% 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.