· Private foundation
Minnesota Colon and Rectal Foundation
MINNESOTA COLON AND RECTAL FOUNDATION IS DEDICATED TO IMPROVING COLORECTAL HEALTH THROUGH EDUCATION, OUTREACH, RESEARCH AND SPECIALIZED PHYSICIAN TRAINING 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
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $5k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $87k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ANGEL FOUNDATION | $50,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION | $22,000 |
| HENNEPIN HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION | $20,000 |
| RESEARCH FOUNDATION ASCRS | $12,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $12,325 |
| UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| RANDY SHAVER CANCER RESEARCH COMMUNITY FUND | $10,000 |
| CROHN'S & COLITIS FOUNDATION MINNESOTADAKOTAS CHAPTER | $5,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 94% of your 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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +30% since the first grant, against +5% for the ones you funded once.
5 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 3 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, 53% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $67k 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
- UOUNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION3× · 2017–2025 · $257k · revenue +105%
- HHHENNEPIN HEALTH FOUNDATION2× · 2022–2025 · $45k · revenue +30%
- RSRANDY SHAVER CANCER RESEARCH AND COMMUNITY FUND2× · 2023–2025 · $36k · revenue +27%
Funded once
- IIiHealth Incone grant, 2024 · $120k · revenue +5% · 66% of their budget
- UOUNIVERSITY OF MNone grant, 2023 · $106k
- UOU OF MNone grant, 2022 · $74k
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.
The minnesota hospital foundation works on strategies that include data-led quality and safety improvement, education, research, training and leadership to improve the health of minnesotans.
The GI Research Foundation works to treat, prevent, and cure digestive diseases. In collaboration with the physicians and scientists at the University of Chicago Digestive Diseases Center, we fund innovative clinical and laboratory…
Investigate ways to make remote communications and monitoring of patients cost effective and practical. this includes evaluation of both traditional and novel uses of various audio, video and data acquisition systems for communication and…
See schedule o:asco is a professional oncology society committed to conquering cancer through research, education, and promotion of the highest quality patient care.
Provide professional services for the diagnosis and treatment of cancer and infectious disease and related conditions.
To be the leading voice of medicine to make minnesota the healthiest state and the best place to practice.
MCF is a vibrant philanthropic community connecting, strengthening and mobilizing the power of philanthropy to advance prosperity and equity.
The mission of the minneapolis regional chamber development foundation is to offer innovative ways of reducing unemployment, improve educational opportunities for disadvantaged youth, initiate and conduct leadership development programs…
Asco association promotes the common business interests of its members by: (1) advocating for policies that improve the quality of cancer care; (2) maintaining the highest standards of oncology medical care through programs supporting…
Engage actively and continuously in medical research, education and training in the practice of medicine in conjunction with the department of family medicine of the indiana university school of medicine and indiana university…
Riverwood foundation exists to raise money for riverwood healthcare center to enhance the quality of care for the community we serve.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Minnesota Colorectal Cancer Research Foundation and the most unlike its peers is IHealth Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
8 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. 8 of the 17 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 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds iHealth Inc ↗
- Who funds TWIN CITIES ORTHOPEDICS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ANGEL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HENNEPIN HEALTH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds RANDY SHAVER CANCER RESEARCH AND COMMUNITY FUND ↗
- Who funds MINNESOTA COLORECTAL CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds COLON CANCER COALITION INC ↗
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: Charities Aid Foundation America · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
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 Minnesota Colon and Rectal 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Minnesota Colon and Rectal Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Minnesota Colon and Rectal 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.