Skip to content
Lynda M Goldstein Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Lynda M Goldstein Family 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.

$330k
Granted FY2025still arriving
22
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$75k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Education$580kInternational$240kHuman Services$180kArts & Culture$115kHealth$87kYouth Development$84kPhilanthropy$83kCivil Rights$70kOther$0
02FY2025 · 22 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k9 grants · $45k
  • $10k–50k12 grants · $210k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $75k
$10,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$7.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ROSE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$75,000
AMERICAN JEWISH WORLD SERVICE$30,000
GIRL RISING$20,000
JEWISH FEDERATION OF LOS ANGELES$20,000
UNIVERSITY OF DENVERIGLI$20,000
JEWISHCOLORADO$20,000
ROSE ANDOM CENTER$20,000
METROPOLITAN STATE DENVER FOUNDATION - UNIVERSITY ADVANCEMENT$20,000
JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF COLORADO$20,000
SECURE COMMUNITY NETWORK$10,000
COBALT FOUNDATION$10,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF THE ROCKY MOUNTAINS$10,000
WARREN VILLAGE$10,000
FOOD BANK OF THE ROCKIES$5,000
RED TENT FUND$5,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY20–25, $105k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%RED TENT FUND: $5k → 14%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF COLORADO: $20k → 12%Jewish Family Service: $15k → 12%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF COLORADO: $15k → 12%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF COLORADO: $15k → 12%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF COLORADO: $15k → 12%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF COLORADO: $10k → 12%WARREN VILLAGE: $10k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

NH
WA
NY
MA
CA
CO
DC
TX
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 15% of Lynda M Goldstein Family Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 53% of the giving stays in CO; by stated purpose, 48%.

Lynda M Goldstein Family Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 4.3% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

61%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$757k · 13 repeat orgs$477k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +30% since the first grant, against +28% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 11 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
14

Total granted

$757k
$382k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+30%
+28%

Still filing today

69%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 54% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $95k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Civil RightsEducationHealthHuman ServicesArts & CultureEnvironmentOther
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

  • R
    Redline
    7× · 2017–2025 · $110k · revenue +131%
  • JF
    JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF COLORADO INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $90k · revenue +62%
  • WR
    Womens Regional Network
    4× · 2020–2023 · $80k · revenue +30%

Funded once

  • HD
    HARVARD DEBATE INCORPORATEDgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $250k · revenue +52%
  • WS
    WATERSHED SCHOOL INC
    one grant, 2024 · $50k · revenue -19%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2020 · $20k
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
CarbonPlan

Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.

Environment
2
Colorado Gives Foundation

We connect people, ideas, and nonprofits to make good happen. our vision is that all of jeffco is thriving.

Philanthropy
3
Colorado Museum of Natural History

Be a catalyst! Ignite our community's passion for nature and science.

Arts & Culture
4
Colorado Legal Services

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.

Crime & Legal
5
National Council of Jewish Women Incorporated

The national council of jewish women is a grassroots nonpartisan organization of volunteers and advocates who strive for social justice by improving the quality of life for women, children and families.

Community Improvement
6
Colorado Center On Law and Policy

Colorado center on law and policy is an antipoverty organization advancing the rights of every coloradan.

Crime & Legal
7
Npr Foundation

The npr foundation ("foundation") is organized and operated exclusively for the benefit of its sole supported organization, national public radio, inc. ("npr inc."). the foundation supports npr inc. through various activities such as…

—
8
The Rand Corporation

Help improve policy and decision making through research and analysis.

Public Benefit
9
The Water Research Foundation

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…

Environment
10
Colorado Nonprofit Association

Colorado nonprofit association strengthens colorado's nonprofits through education, connection and advocacy.

Community Improvement
11
Co-Impact Philanthropic Funds Inc

Philanthropic collaborative focused on improving lives through just & inclusive systems change.

Philanthropy
12
Arbor Research Collaborative for Health

Arbor research collaborative for health is committed to improving patient care through research that shapes medical policies and practice. in particular, arbor research conducts health outcomes research on chronic disease and end-stage…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Conservation Colorado Education Fund; the most unlike its peers is Womens Regional Network. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

32 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. 32 of the 43 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
32/32
Grantees still filing
19/32
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HARVARD DEBATE INCORPORATED: $250,000 · EducationHARVARD DEBATE INCORPORATEDPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $100,000 · EducationPresident and Fellows of Harv…WATERSHED SCHOOL INC: $50,000 · EducationWATERSHED SCHOOL INCNEW VILLAGE CHARTER SCHOOL INC: $25,000 · EducationNEW VILLAGE CHARTER SCHOOL IN…UNIVERSITY OF DENVERKORBEL: $80,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF DENVERKORBELWomens Regional Network: $80,000 · OtherWomens Regional NetworkMETROPOLITAN STATE DENVER FOUNDATION - UNIVERSITY ADVANCEMENT: $50,000 · OtherMETROPOLITAN STATE DENVER FOUNDAT…HART CENTER FOR PUBLIC SERVICE: $25,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF DENVERIGLI: $20,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $20,000 · OtherJEWISH FEDERATION OF LOS ANGELES: $20,000 · OtherCOBALT FOUNDATION: $55,000 · OtherCOBALT FOUNDATIONROSE ANDOM CENTER INC: $35,000 · OtherROSE ANDOM CENTER INC+16 more: $103,000 · Other+16 moreAMERICAN JEWISH WORLD SERVICE INC: $195,000 · InternationalAMERICAN JEWISH WOR…Girl Rising: $80,000 · InternationalGirl Rising+1 more: $5,000 · InternationalRose Community Foundation: $75,000 · PhilanthropyJEWISHColorado: $40,000 · PhilanthropyOMPRAKASH INC: $5,000 · PhilanthropyROCKY MOUNTAIN PLANNED PARENTHOOD INC: $78,000 · HealthPARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $35,000 · Health+1 more: $2,500 · HealthRedline: $110,000 · Arts & CulturePUBLIC BROADCASTING OF COLORADO INC: $5,000 · Arts & CultureJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF COLORADO INC: $90,000 · Human ServicesWARREN VILLAGE INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesRED TENT FUND: $5,000 · Human Services
Education$425,000Other$488,000International$280,000Philanthropy$120,000Health$115,500Arts & Culture$115,000Human Services$105,000

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 budgetHARVARD DEBATE INCORPORATED: $250,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetAMERICAN JEWISH WORLD SERVICE INC: $195,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetRedline: $110,000 over 7y, 1.4% of budgetPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $100,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF COLORADO INC: $90,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetWomens Regional Network: $80,000 over 4y, 21% of budgetGirl Rising: $80,000 over 5y, 1.0% of budgetROCKY MOUNTAIN PLANNED PARENTHOOD INC: $78,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetCOBALT FOUNDATION: $55,000 over 5y, 1.9% of budgetWATERSHED SCHOOL INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetJEWISHColorado: $40,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetPARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $35,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetROSE ANDOM CENTER INC: $35,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetNEW VILLAGE CHARTER SCHOOL INC: $25,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetProgress Texas Institute: $10,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetRainforest Action Network: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWARREN VILLAGE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE COLORADO NONPROFIT DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetOMPRAKASH INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetACLU FOUNDATION OF COLORADO INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMETRO CARING: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPFLAG: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPUBLIC BROADCASTING OF COLORADO INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFOOD BANK OF THE ROCKIES: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTREVOR PROJECT INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNeshama Center: $2,500 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetTHE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCONSERVATION COLORADO EDUCATION FUND: $2,500 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.

Rose Community Founda…The Denver FoundationThe Women's Foundatio…Community Foundation …Colorado Gives Founda…The Swaha FoundationXcel Energy FoundationThe Colorado Health F…Verizon FoundationVanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…National Philanthropi…
Rose Community FoundationCO21.4× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Rose Community Foundation · The Denver Foundation · The Women's Foundation of Colorado Inc · Community Foundation Boulder County · Colorado Gives Foundation · The Swaha Foundation · Xcel Energy Foundation · The Colorado Health Foundation · Verizon Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · National Philanthropic Trust

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 Lynda M Goldstein Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Lynda M Goldstein Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College: 7% of income from government
  • Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
10report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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 Lynda M Goldstein Family Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Lynda M Goldstein Family 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 43 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 Lynda M Goldstein Family’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