Skip to content

· Private foundation

Mark and Linda Kissel 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.

$136k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$33k
Largest
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.

Housing & Shelter$665kHuman Services$310kAnimals$46k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $126k
$20,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$3.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GREELEY-WELD HABITAT FOR HUMANITY$32,557
PIKES PEAK HABITAT FOR HUMANITY$32,557
BLUE SPRUCE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY$30,967
PUPPIES BEHIND BARS$20,000
WARREN VILLAGE$10,000
MT CARMEL VETERANS SERVICE CENTER$5,000
PILOTS TO THE RESCUE$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 (FY17–25, $240k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%PUPPIES BEHIND BARS: $20k → 17%PUPPIES BEHIND BARS: $20k → 17%WARREN VILLAGE: $10k → 12%PUPPIES BEHIND BARS: $20k → 17%WARREN VILLAGE: $10k → 12%PUPPIES BEHIND BARS: $20k → 17%WARREN VILLAGE: $10k → 12%PUPPIES BEHIND BARS: $20k → 17%WARREN VILLAGE: $10k → 12%PUPPIES BEHIND BARS: $20k → 17%WARREN VILLAGE: $10k → 12%PUPPIES BEHIND BARS: $20k → 17%WARREN VILLAGE: $10k → 12%PUPPIES BEHIND BARS: $20k → 17%PUPPIES BEHIND BARS: $20k → 17%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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$981k · 10 repeat orgs$40k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
2

Total granted

$981k
$35k

Still filing today

80%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesAnimalsHousing & ShelterEmploymentOther
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

  • PP
    PIKES PEAK HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
    9× · 2017–2025 · $313k · revenue +160%
  • PB
    PUPPIES BEHIND BARS INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $180k · revenue +29%
  • BS
    BLUE SPRUCE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
    8× · 2017–2025 · $145k · revenue +102%

Funded once

  • HF
    HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
    one grant, 2017 · $30k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $5k
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
Platte Ranch Forever Home Sanctuary
Animals
2
Fort Collins Habitat for Humanity

Seeking to put god's love into action; habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, communities, and hope to realize our vision of a world where everyone has a decent place to live. fort collins habitat for humanity adheres…

Housing & Shelter
3
Habitat for Humanity St Vrain Valley

Seeking to put god's love into action, habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, communities, and hope to realize our vision of a world where everyone has a decent place to live. habitat for humanity st. vrain valley…

—
4
Topeka Habitat for Humanity

Seeking to put god's love into action, habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, communities and hope to realize our vision of a world where everyone has a decent place to live. topeka habitat for humanity adheres to a…

—
5
Sandusky County Habitat for Humanity International

Seeking to put god's love into action, habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, communities and hope to realize our vision of a world where everyone has a decent place to live. habitat for humanity sandusky county…

Housing & Shelter
6
Habitat for Humanity of Colorado Inc

Seeking to put god's love into action, habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, communities and hope. hfhc builds the capacity of habitat for humanity affiliates in colorado by increasing access to resources,…

—
7
Chaffee County Habitat for Humanity

Seeking to put god's love into action, habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, communities and hope.

—
8
Palouse Habitat for Humanity

Seeking to put god's love into action, habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, communities and hope to realize our vision of the world where everyone has a decent place to live. palouse habitat for humanity adheres to a…

—
9
Humane Society of the Pikes Peak Region

To offer compassionate care to animals, support safe communities, and provide socially conscious sheltering. (continued on schedule o)

Animals
10
Buckeye Ridge Habitat for Humanity Inc

Seeking to put god's love into action, habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, communities, and hope to realize our vision of a world where everyone has a decent place to live. habitat for humanity buckeye ridge adheres…

—
11
Habitat for Humanity International Inc

Seeking to put gods love into action, habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, communities and hope.

—
12
Habitat for Humanity Greater San Francisco

Habitat for humanity greater san francisco builds and sustains affordable homeownership opportunities for families in marin, san francisco and san mateo counties.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Loveland Habitat for Humanity Inc; the most unlike its peers is Speak Rescue and Sanctuary. 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

10 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. 10 of the 13 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)
9/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PIKES PEAK HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $313,077 · OtherPIKES PEAK HABITAT FOR HUMANITYBLUE SPRUCE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $144,825 · OtherBLUE SPRUCE HABITAT FOR HUMANITYLOVELAND HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC: $115,401 · OtherLOVELAND HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INCTAYA AND CHRIS KYLE FOUNDATION SERVICE FAMILY STRONG: $65,000 · OtherTAYA AND CHRIS KYLE FOUNDATION SERVICE FAMILY STRONGHABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $30,042 · Other+2 more: $15,000 · OtherPUPPIES BEHIND BARS INC: $180,000 · Human ServicesPUPPIES BEHIND BARS INCWARREN VILLAGE INC: $60,000 · Human ServicesWARREN VILLAGE INCGREELEY AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $61,933 · Housing & ShelterSpeak Rescue and Sanctuary: $17,000 · AnimalsAMERICAN ESKIMO RESCUE OF ST LOUIS: $14,000 · AnimalsMT CARMEL VETERANS SERVICE CENTER: $5,000 · Employment
Other$683,345Human Services$240,000Housing & Shelter$61,933Animals$31,000Employment$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPIKES PEAK HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $313,077 over 9y, 1.0% of budgetPUPPIES BEHIND BARS INC: $180,000 over 9y, 0.7% of budgetBLUE SPRUCE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $144,825 over 8y, 2.0% of budgetLOVELAND HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC: $115,401 over 7y, 0.6% of budgetTAYA AND CHRIS KYLE FOUNDATION SERVICE FAMILY STRONG: $65,000 over 5y, 1.8% of budgetGREELEY AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $61,933 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetWARREN VILLAGE INC: $60,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetSpeak Rescue and Sanctuary: $17,000 over 6y, 4.7% of budgetAMERICAN ESKIMO RESCUE OF ST LOUIS: $14,000 over 4y, 9.7% of budgetMT CARMEL VETERANS SERVICE CENTER: $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.

  • Who funds PIKES PEAK HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ↗
  • Who funds PUPPIES BEHIND BARS INC ↗
  • Who funds BLUE SPRUCE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ↗
  • Who funds LOVELAND HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC ↗
  • Who funds TAYA AND CHRIS KYLE FOUNDATION SERVICE FAMILY STRONG ↗
  • Who funds GREELEY AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ↗
  • Who funds WARREN VILLAGE INC ↗
  • Who funds Speak Rescue and Sanctuary ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN ESKIMO RESCUE OF ST LOUIS ↗
  • Who funds MT CARMEL VETERANS SERVICE CENTER ↗

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 FoundationCO15× affinity5 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Colorado Gives Foundation · Habitat for Humanity of Colorado Inc · Thrivent Financial for Lutherans-Group · Habitat for Humanity International Inc · Enterprise Holdings Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Mark and Linda Kissel Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Mark and Linda Kissel Family Foundation. 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%8%15%22%30%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 · 0–30%
    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 Mark and Linda Kissel Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Mark and Linda Kissel 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 13 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 Mark and Linda Kissel Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph