· Private foundation
Nagel Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
Read this first · the figures below need context
57% of Nagel Foundation’s FY2024 grant dollars went to The Catholic Foundation No Colorado, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 10 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k1 grant · $5k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $150k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $185k
- $250k+2 grants · $1.6M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| THE CATHOLIC FOUNDATION OF NORTHERN COLORADO | $1,080,000 |
| ADVANCE COLORADO | $475,000 |
| INNER-CITY SCHOOL | $85,000 |
| CARUSO FAMILY CHARITIES | $50,000 |
| ALLIANCE FOR CHOICE IN EDUCATION | $50,000 |
| GIRLS WITH BOOKS | $35,000 |
| KIWANIS CLUB OF LAKEWOOD FOUNDATION | $35,000 |
| MOTHERING ACROSS CONTINENTS | $35,000 |
| STEP DENVER | $25,000 |
| JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT ROCKY MOUNTAIN | $20,000 |
| ART STUDENTS LEAGUE OF DENVER | $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.
Your human-services grants (FY19–22, $91k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 18% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
Which US states your grants reach
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 +108% since the first grant, against +2% for the ones you funded once.
19 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2024, 12 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $90k 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
- AFALLIANCE FOR CHOICE IN EDUCATION3× · 2019–2024 · $1.4M · revenue +144%
- ACADVANCE COLORADO2× · 2023–2024 · $575k · revenue +85%
- ISINNER-CITY SCHOOL INC6× · 2019–2024 · $420k · revenue +147%
Funded once
- CFCOMMUNIO FOUNDATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $75k · revenue +331%
- AOARCHDIOCESE OF DENVERone grant, 2019 · $50k
- LCLEON COone grant, 2019 · $10k
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.
To provide timely, credible and accessible analyses of fiscal and economic issues facing colorado to inform public policy debates and promote economic prosperity
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…
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.
The mission of the center for legal inclusiveness (cli) is to advance diversity in the legal profession by actively educating and supporting private and public sector legal organizations in their individual campaigns to create cultures of…
Be a catalyst! Ignite our community's passion for nature and science.
Colorado center on law and policy is an antipoverty organization advancing the rights of every coloradan.
The mission of education commission of the states is to advocate for attaining educational excellence for all and to help state leaders identify, develop and implement public policy for education that addresses current and future needs of…
The american enterprise institute is a community of scholars and supporters committed to expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity, and strengthening free enterprise. aei pursues these ideals through independent thinking and the…
To promote excellence, equity, impartiality, and public trust in Colorado's courts through outreach, education, and engagement.
TO MANAGE AN INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, HEALTH, AND RELIEF FOCUSED FAMILY OF ORGANIZATIONS HELPING PEOPLE AND COMMUNITIES LIFT THEMSELVES OUT OF POVERTY, SUPPORT WELL-BEING OF INDIVIDUALS, FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES, AND PROVIDE…
Colorado nonprofit association strengthens colorado's nonprofits through education, connection and advocacy.
Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Catholic Foundation No Colorado and the most unlike its peers is Caruso Family Charities. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 26 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
32 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. 32 of the 40 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 THE CATHOLIC FOUNDATION NO COLORADO ↗
- Who funds ALLIANCE FOR CHOICE IN EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds ADVANCE COLORADO ↗
- Who funds INNER-CITY SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds Step Denver ↗
- Who funds COMMUNIO FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CARUSO FAMILY CHARITIES ↗
- Who funds Girls With Books ↗
- Who funds KIWANIS CLUB OF LAKEWOOD FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MOTHERING ACROSS CONTINENTS INC ↗
- Who funds JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT-ROCKY MOUNTAIN INC ↗
- Who funds MAYO CLINIC ↗
- Who funds Leadership Institute ↗
- Who funds TURNING POINT USA INC ↗
- Who funds PRAGER UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ART STUDENTS LEAGUE OF DENVER ↗
- Who funds HEALTHNETWORK FOUNDATION FKA HEALTH NET FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds LEON CO ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds REGIS UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds PROJECT EDUCATION SUDAN ↗
- Who funds RINO ART DISTRICT ↗
- Who funds JUDICIAL WATCH INC ↗
- Who funds OPERA COLORADO ↗
- Who funds CATO INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS ↗
- Who funds DENVER ART MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds Colorado Christian University ↗
- Who funds Greater Park Hill Community Inc ↗
- Who funds COMMON SENSE INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds COLORADO WATERCOLOR SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds COLORADO COUNCIL ON ECONOMIC EDUCATION ↗
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: Colorado Gives Foundation · The Denver Foundation · Daniels Fund · Amg Charitable Gift Foundation · Pema Foundation Inc · The Anschutz Foundation · Rose Community Foundation · El Pomar Foundation · Xcel Energy Foundation · The Galena Foundation · Adolph Coors Foundation · The Janus Henderson 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 Nagel 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.