Skip to content
Lincoln Hills Cares Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Lincoln Hills Cares Foundation

The LINCOLN HILLS CARES FOUNDATION provides philanthropic support to develop the next generation of leaders through outdoor and environmental education, cultural history exploration, and workforce advancement.

$939k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$726k
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 2025.

Youth Development$6.1MArts & Culture$934kHuman Services$305kEnvironment$255kEducation$30kRecreation & Sports$16kCommunity Improvement$15k
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $13k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $200k
  • $250k+1 grant · $726k
$200,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LINCOLN HILLS CARES$726,083
TEENS INC$200,000
BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF COLORADO$12,500
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:

Its human-services grants (FY19–19, $305k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%RIVER DEEP FOUNDATION: $305k → 12%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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$6.9M · 7 repeat orgs$758k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +65% since the first grant, against +38% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
9

Total granted

$6.9M
$758k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+65%
+38%

Still filing today

71%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’23’24’25
Youth DevelopmentArts & CultureEducationHuman ServicesCrime & LegalRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • TI
    TEENS INC
    8× · 2017–2025 · $2.9M · revenue +65%
  • LH
    LINCOLN HILLS CARES
    9× · 2017–2025 · $2.3M · revenue +344% · 98% of their budget
  • CM
    Colorado Museum of Natural History
    5× · 2017–2021 · $934k · revenue +26%

Funded once

  • RD
    RIVER DEEP FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2019 · $305k · revenue -89% · 29% of their budget
  • BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF METRO DENVER INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $202k · revenue +40%
  • NS
    NEXUS SUMMER PROGRAM
    one grant, 2019 · $116k
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
Rocky Mountain Youth Corps

Rocky mountain youth corps engages young people in the outdoors, inspiring them to use their strengths and potential to lead healthy, productive lives. we teach responsibility for self, community, and environment through teamwork, service,…

Youth Development
2
Colorado Wellness Center for Girls
—
3
Girl Scouts of Colorado

Girl scouts of colorado prepares girls and adults to create unique leadership paths, ignite change, and share a worldwide sisterhood through traditions and new experiences. girl scouts builds girls of courage, confidence, and character,…

Youth Development
4
Colorado Health Institute
Health
5
Boys & Girls Club of Northwest Colo

The mission of the clubs is to enable and inspire the youth of our area to reach their full potential as productive, responsible and caring citizens. the clubs offers core programs designed to engage youth with peers and caring adults to…

Youth Development
6
Stronger Faster Boulder Co
Recreation & Sports
7
Denver Youth Program

Youth counseling and mentoring.

Youth Development
8
Denver Police Activities League Inc

The denver police activities league's (pal) mission is to create strong communities by providing under-resourced children with opportunities, exposure, and experiences with the intent of changing young people's lives in a positive way.

Youth Development
9
Denver Zoological Foundation

Inspiring communities to save wildlife for future generations.

Animals
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
Colorado Dream Foundation

We partner with youth and their families as they successfully navigate school, college, and career by providing a holistic academic, social, and emotional program from elementary school through college, along with post-secondary…

—
12
Girls Incorporated of Metro Denver

To inspire all girls to be strong, smart, and bold.

Youth Development
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Teens Inc; the most unlike its peers is Colorado Mountain Bike Association. 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

12 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. 12 of the 16 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

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)
11/12
Grantees still filing
9/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LINCOLN HILLS CARES: $2,345,583 · Arts & CultureLINCOLN HILLS CARESColorado Museum of Natural History: $933,822 · Arts & CultureColorado Museum of Natural HistoryTEENS INC: $2,858,063 · Youth DevelopmentTEENS INCBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS IN COLORADO INC: $382,890 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS IN COLORADO INC+1 more: $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentCITYWILD: $255,201 · OtherCITYWILDBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF METRO DENVER INC: $201,714 · OtherBOYS AND G…NEXUS SUMMER PROGRAM: $115,816 · OtherNEXUS SUMM…Boys & Girls Club of Colorado: $75,000 · OtherBoys & Gir…IEG INC: $33,473 · Other+1 more: $5,000 · OtherRIVER DEEP FOUNDATION: $304,745 · Human ServicesHEART AND HAND CENTER: $75,000 · Crime & LegalUNIVERSITY OF DENVER: $24,831 · EducationDENVER PUBLIC LIBRARY FRIENDS FOUNDATION: $5,000 · EducationColorado Mountain Bike Association: $16,000 · Recreation & Sports
Arts & Culture$3,279,405Youth Development$3,250,953Other$686,204Human Services$304,745Crime & Legal$75,000Education$29,831Recreation & Sports$16,000

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 budgetTEENS INC: $2,858,063 over 8y, 12% of budgetLINCOLN HILLS CARES: $2,345,583 over 9y, 98% of budgetColorado Museum of Natural History: $933,822 over 5y, 0.8% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS IN COLORADO INC: $382,890 over 4y, 26% of budgetRIVER DEEP FOUNDATION: $304,745 over 1y, 29% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF METRO DENVER INC: $201,714 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetHEART AND HAND CENTER: $75,000 over 3y, 2.9% of budgetIEG INC: $33,473 over 2y, 8.2% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF DENVER: $24,831 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetColorado Mountain Bike Association: $16,000 over 1y, 6.5% of budgetYOUNG LIFE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDENVER PUBLIC LIBRARY FRIENDS FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

The Denver FoundationColorado Gives Founda…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Denver FoundationCO14.9× affinity5 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Denver Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Lincoln Hills Cares Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Lincoln Hills Cares Foundation. 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%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 Lincoln Hills Cares Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Lincoln Hills Cares 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.

    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 16 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Lincoln Hills Cares’ 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