Skip to content
Lucile Drinkwater Allen Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Lucile Drinkwater Allen Trust

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.

$8k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$2k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Animals$71kHuman Services$1kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$204k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MYAS RESCUED ANGELS$1,500
PAWSCO$1,500
FRONT RANGE FREEDOM RESCUE INC$1,500
ANIMAL RESCUE OF THE ROCKIES$1,500
GRAND RIVERS HUMANE SOCIETY$1,500
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 (FY19–21, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%INTERNATIONAL HEARING DOG INC: $2k → 10%INTERNATIONAL HEARING DOG INC: $2k → 10%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.

75%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$56k · 11 repeat orgs$19k to everyone else

11 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
6

Total granted

$56k
$17k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+7%
+24%

Still filing today

100%
83%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsHuman ServicesRecreation & 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

  • TH
    THE HUMANE SOCIETY OF BOULDER VALLEY INC
    2× · 2019–2020 · $10k · revenue +47%
  • AR
    ANIMAL RESCUE OF THE ROCKIES
    5× · 2020–2025 · $8k · revenue +25%
  • NM
    National Mill Dog Rescue
    2× · 2023–2024 · $6k · revenue +7%

Funded once

  • CA
    Cat Assistance Referral & Education
    one grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue -11%
  • NC
    Nuzzles & Co
    one grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue +6%
  • LH
    LONGMONT HUMANE SOCIETY INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $3k · revenue +43%
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
Hope Fur Paws Rescue

To help injured, abandoned and unwanted animals. We provide food, vet care that includes heartworm prevention and spay or neuter services, shelter and anything else needed.

Animals
2
Dogs Unbroken

Dog Rescue Dogs Unbroken supports Colorado dogs at higher risk for euthanasia evaluating their behavioral stability and applying training methods appropriate for their needs. The goal of helping each dog learn to make good choices in…

Animals
3
Raskels Rescue
Animals
4
Fur Animal Rescue

Animal rescue organization dedicated to finding homes for animals at the animal shelter. we also provde vet care foster homes, and assistance with homing for special needs animals.

Animals
5
Rescue Coop
Animals
6
Paws On the Ground Colorado

dog rescue and adoption

Animals
7
Pets Without Partners

Find homes for homeless/abandoned dogs. Provide full vet car and housing while awaiting adoption,

Animals
8
Paws Animal Rescue Center

To help rescue unwanted pets

Animals
9
Front Range German Shepherd Rescue Inc

Rescues dogs, rehomes German shepherds, and provides medical and shelter care.

Animals
10
Runaways Animal Rescue
Animals
11
Fred's Mission Rescue and Sanctuary

Rescue dogs, which includes housing, vetting, and transport.

Animals
12
St Clouds Rescue
Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Humane Society of Boulder Valley Inc; the most unlike its peers is National Mill Dog Rescue. 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

16 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. 16 of the 18 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
10/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE HUMANE SOCIETY OF BOULDER VALLEY INC: $10,000 · AnimalsTHE HUMANE SOCIETY OF BOULDER VALLEY INCANIMAL RESCUE OF THE ROCKIES: $8,100 · AnimalsANIMAL RESCUE OF THE ROCKIESFRONT RANGE FREEDOM RESCUE INC: $5,500 · AnimalsFRONT RANGE FREEDOM RESCUE INCCat Assistance Referral & Education (CARE): $5,000 · AnimalsCat Assistance Referral & Education (CARE)Nuzzles & Co: $5,000 · AnimalsNuzzles & CoROCKY MOUNTAIN FRENCH BULLDOG RESCUE: $5,000 · AnimalsROCKY MOUNTAIN FRENCH BULLDOG RESCUEThe Street Dog Coalition: $4,000 · AnimalsThe Street Dog CoalitionPAWSCO: $3,500 · AnimalsPAWSCOGRAND RIVERS HUMANE SOCIETY: $3,500 · AnimalsGRAND RIVERS HUMANE SOCIETYNORTHERN COLORADO FRIENDS OF FERALS: $3,400 · AnimalsNORTHERN COLORADO FRIENDS OF FERALSLONGMONT HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $3,000 · AnimalsHARLEYS HOPE FOUNDATION: $3,000 · Animals+1 more: $1,000 · AnimalsNational Mill Dog Rescue: $6,000 · Recreation & SportsNational …Individual grant recipient: $2,000 · OtherMYAS RESCUED ANGELS: $1,500 · OtherPEACEWORKS INC: $1,000 · OtherPARAGON SERVICE DOGS: $3,500 · Human Services
Animals$60,000Recreation & Sports$6,000Other$4,500Human Services$3,500

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE HUMANE SOCIETY OF BOULDER VALLEY INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetANIMAL RESCUE OF THE ROCKIES: $8,100 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetNational Mill Dog Rescue: $6,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetFRONT RANGE FREEDOM RESCUE INC: $5,500 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetCat Assistance Referral & Education (CARE): $5,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetNuzzles & Co: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetROCKY MOUNTAIN FRENCH BULLDOG RESCUE: $5,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetThe Street Dog Coalition: $4,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetPAWSCO: $3,500 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetPARAGON SERVICE DOGS: $3,500 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetGRAND RIVERS HUMANE SOCIETY: $3,500 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetNORTHERN COLORADO FRIENDS OF FERALS: $3,400 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetLONGMONT HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPROJECT ANIMALAID: $1,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetPEACEWORKS INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.3% 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.

Colorado Gives Founda…Mary Elizabeth Bates …Alice Jenkins Foundat…Corrales Friends of A…Pedigree FoundationPetco LoveEl Pomar FoundationAnimal Assistance Fou…AEC TrustWestern Union Foundat…Otter Cares Foundatio…BISSELL Pet Foundation
Colorado Gives FoundationCO25.9× affinity11 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Colorado Gives Foundation · Mary Elizabeth Bates Foundation · Alice Jenkins Foundation · Corrales Friends of Animals Foundation Dba Dennis Friends Foundation · Pedigree Foundation · Petco Love · El Pomar Foundation · Animal Assistance Foundation · AEC Trust · Western Union Foundation · Otter Cares Foundation AKA OTTERCARES FOUNDATION · BISSELL Pet 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 Lucile Drinkwater Allen Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Lucile Drinkwater Allen Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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.

    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 18 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-PF 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 Lucile Drinkwater Allen’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