Skip to content
Pikes Peak Area Rotary Endowment at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Pikes Peak Area Rotary Endowment

To provide funds to nonprofit organizations in the Pikes Peak region to help further their nonprofit mission.

$135k
Granted FY2024still arriving
5
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$27k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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 2024.

Human Services$346kFood & Nutrition$120kHealth$43kYouth Development$5k
02FY2024 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 5 grants below total $58,500, the rows itemized in this filing. The $134,548 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $76,048 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k3 grants · $22k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $37k
$8,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Westside Cares$27,000
Little Chapel Food Pantry$10,000
Fostering Hope Foundation$8,000
Multiple Sclerosis Alliance of Southern Colorado$7,500
Assistance League of Colorado Springs$6,000
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 (FY17–24, $78k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, 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%Fostering Hope Foundation: $8k → 9%Community of Caring Foundation Inc: $10k → 8%Fostering Hope Foundation: $8k → 9%Community of Caring Foundation Inc: $10k → 8%Community of Caring Cripple Creek: $9k → 8%Assistance League of Colorado Springs: $6k → 9%Community of Caring Foundation Inc: $9k → 8%Community of Caring Foundation Inc: $7k → 8%Assistance League of Colorado Springs: $6k → 9%DIAKONIA: $5k → 9%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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$483k · 9 repeat orgs$32k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +14% since the first grant, against +9% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
5

Total granted

$483k
$32k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+14%
+9%

Still filing today

78%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesHealthHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • WC
    WESTSIDE CARES INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $213k · revenue +65%
  • CO
    Community of Caring Foundation Inc
    5× · 2019–2023 · $45k · revenue +101%
  • FH
    FOSTERING HOPE FOUNDATION
    2× · 2023–2024 · $16k · revenue +14%

Funded once

  • CC
    Community Coalition for Families and Childrengraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $8k · revenue +91%
  • CC
    CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF COLO SPRINGS
    one grant, 2017 · $7k
  • AL
    ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF COLO SPRINGS
    one grant, 2017 · $6k
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
Urban Outreach Denver

Urban Outreach Denver exists to connect people to God and to a community of support by caring for both short-term and long-term needs in the areas of food, clothing, shlter, medical care, education and job preparation.

Human Services
2
Family Housing Network of Fort Collins Inc

Faith Family Hospitality's mission is to support families experiencing homelessness to achieve sustainable self-sufficiency in a timely and dignified manner. This interfaith volunteer effort coordinates the work of 30 diverse Fort Collins…

Human Services
3
Parker Task Force for Human Services

The Parker Task Force for Human Services is a 100% volunteer-run nonprofit organization primarily dedicated to offering support to individuals and families in Parker, Franktown, and Elizabeth, Colorado, by providing food, limited financial…

—
4
Integrated Family Community Services

To use community resources to provide basic human services and enrichment programs to low-income people, while fostering self-sufficiency and respecting the dignity of each client.

Human Services
5
Colorado Homeless Families Inc

CHF assists working families in their quest to go from homelessness to self-sufficiency for life.

Housing & Shelter
6
Colorado Springs Independence Center

We work with people with disabilities, their families and the community to create independence so that all may thrive.

Human Services
7
Home Together Fund

The Home Together Fund, through its private donors, is there in time of need to provide financial assistance so that people affected by disaster have a means to maintain a safe home for their families. The Home Together Fund provides…

Housing & Shelter
8
Foothills Food Bank

The Foothills Food Bank works to ensure access to quality, nutritious food to community members in need, and deliver services with respect and dignity.

—
9
The Christian Home for Children Inc

Christian Home for Children, also known as Family Life Services, facilitates life transformation for single moms and their children through faith-based community. This is accomplished through a resident program and a community outreach…

—
10
Connections for Independent Living

To promote the full inclusion and integration of people with all types of disabilities into all levels of society.

—
11
Colorado Thrives

Colorado Thrives exists to support Coloradans to achieve economic mobility through access to good jobs.

Community Improvement
12
A Caring Crisis Pregnancy Center of Northeast Colorado

The Organization was incorporated under the laws of the State of Colorado in 1999 for the purpose of providing support and alternative services for women and men who experience an unplanned pregnancy. As a faith based organization, the…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is B Cos We Care for Our Community Fka Assistance League of Colorado Spring; the most unlike its peers is Multiple Sclerosis Society of Colorado Springs. 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 14 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

WESTSIDE CARES INC: $213,300 · OtherWESTSIDE CARES INCLITTLE CHAPEL OF THE HILLS: $72,000 · OtherLITTLE CHAPEL OF THE HILLSCommunity Cupboard of Woodland Park Inc: $48,250 · OtherCommunity Cupboard of Woodland Park IncCOMMUNITY OF CARING CRIPPLECREEK: $21,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY OF CARING CRIPPLECREEK+3 more: $19,200 · OtherCommunity of Caring Foundation Inc: $45,000 · Human ServicesCommunity of Cari…FOSTERING HOPE FOUNDATION: $16,000 · Human ServicesFOSTERING HOPE FO…B COS WE CARE FOR OUR COMMUNITY FKA ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF COLORADO SPRING: $12,000 · Human ServicesB COS WE CARE FOR…Diakonia: $5,400 · Human ServicesDiakoniaMultiple Sclerosis Society of Colorado Springs: $43,000 · HealthMultiple Sc…Community Coalition for Families and Children: $7,500 · HealthCommunity C…HELP THE NEEDY DBA HTN - HOPE LIVES HERE: $12,300 · Housing & Shelter
Other$373,750Human Services$78,400Health$50,500Housing & Shelter$12,300

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 budgetWESTSIDE CARES INC: $213,300 over 8y, 2.0% of budgetCommunity Cupboard of Woodland Park Inc: $48,250 over 5y, 4.7% of budgetCommunity of Caring Foundation Inc: $45,000 over 5y, 0.8% of budgetMultiple Sclerosis Society of Colorado Springs: $43,000 over 6y, 9.2% of budgetFOSTERING HOPE FOUNDATION: $16,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetHELP THE NEEDY DBA HTN - HOPE LIVES HERE: $12,300 over 2y, 5.3% of budgetB COS WE CARE FOR OUR COMMUNITY FKA ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF COLORADO SPRING: $12,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetCommunity Coalition for Families and Children: $7,500 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetREACH PIKES PEAK: $6,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetDiakonia: $5,400 over 1y, 1.1% 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.

The Myron Stratton Ho…INDYGIVE DBA Give Pik…Pikes Peak Community …El Pomar FoundationPikes Peak United WayColorado Springs Heal…Colorado Gives Founda…Creative Providers Fo…Carl W & Carrie Mae J…Av Hunter Trust Incor…The Joseph Henry Edmo…Energy Outreach Color…
The Myron Stratton HomeCO22.1× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Myron Stratton Home · INDYGIVE DBA Give Pikes Peak · Pikes Peak Community Foundation · El Pomar Foundation · Pikes Peak United Way · Colorado Springs Health Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · Creative Providers Foundation · Carl W & Carrie Mae Joslyn Charitable Trust · Av Hunter Trust Incorporated · The Joseph Henry Edmondson Foundation · Energy Outreach Colorado

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 Pikes Peak Area Rotary Endowment funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Pikes Peak Area Rotary Endowment. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%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
    5report 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Pikes Peak Area Rotary Endowment?

    Find your warmest path to Pikes Peak Area Rotary Endowment 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 14 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $125k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Pikes Peak Area Rotary Endowment’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