· Private foundation
Raphael Levy Memorial Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
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 $10k12 grants · $27k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $125k
- $50k–250k4 grants · $202k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| PROJECT WORTHMORE | $51,500 |
| LIGHTHOUSE WRITERS WORKSHOP | $50,000 |
| REDLINE CONTEMPORTY ART CENTER | $50,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF DENVER | $50,000 |
| JDL | $40,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $25,000 |
| ROSE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $15,307 |
| WOMENS' BEAN PROJECT | $15,000 |
| JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE | $10,000 |
| DENVER MUSEUM OF NATURAL SCIENCE | $10,000 |
| HIGHLINE CANAL CONSERVANCY | $10,000 |
| CENTER FOR HEALTH & HOPE | $6,500 |
| MERCY SHIPS | $3,000 |
| ST JUDE CHILDRENS' RESEARCH HOSPITAL | $3,000 |
| TEMPLE EMANUEL | $2,100 |
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 (FY19–24, $553k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 87% of those 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.
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 +51% since the first grant, against -11% for the ones you funded once.
6 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 16 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, 21% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $266k 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
- JFJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF COLORADO INC6× · 2019–2024 · $466k · revenue +88%
- ALANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE3× · 2021–2023 · $205k · revenue +34%
- PWPROJECT WORTHMORE2× · 2021–2024 · $57k · revenue +77%
Funded once
- HFHABITAT FOR HUMANITYone grant, 2022 · $150k
- VFVOLUNTEERS FOR OUTDOOR COLORADOone grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue -20%
- SCSpelman Collegeone grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue -11%
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.
Colorado open lands' mission is to preserve the significant open lands and natural heritage of colorado through private and public partnerships, innovative land conservation, and strategic leadership.
Colorado center on law and policy is an antipoverty organization advancing the rights of every coloradan.
Inspiring communities to save wildlife for future generations.
To restore water to colorado's rivers.
Water education colorado ensures coloradans are informed on water issues and equipped to make decisions that guide our state to a sustainable water future.
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.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
Rocky mountain wild works to protect, connect, and restore wildlife and wild lands in the southern rocky mountain region. we work to secure the biodiversity of the mountains, plains, and desert ecosystems of colorado, wyoming, utah, and…
Perc is dedicated to advancing conservation through markets, incentives, property rights, and partnerships.
To protect, conserve, and restore colorado's native wildlife and habitats. we champion science-based, innovative, collaborative solutions for managing colorado's iconic wildlife and biodiversity, protecting them from threats like habitat…
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…
We bring science, policy, and proven solutions directly to communities working to restore the integrity and natural connectivity of the landscapes in which they live. (see schedule o)
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mile High United Way Inc and the most unlike its peers is Center for Health and Hope. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 29 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% 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.
23 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. 23 of the 41 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 JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF COLORADO INC ↗
- Who funds ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds JEWISHColorado ↗
- Who funds PROJECT WORTHMORE ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF DENVER ↗
- Who funds LIGHTHOUSE WRITERS WORKSHOP INC ↗
- Who funds Rose Community Foundation ↗
- Who funds VOLUNTEERS FOR OUTDOOR COLORADO ↗
- Who funds Spelman College ↗
- Who funds Music Therapy of the Rockies ↗
- Who funds WOMEN'S BEAN PROJECT ↗
- Who funds Center for Health and Hope ↗
- Who funds Second Chance Center Inc ↗
- Who funds MILE HIGH UNITED WAY INC ↗
- Who funds HIGH LINE CANAL CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds FAMILY PROMISE OF GREATER DENVER INC ↗
- Who funds ROCKY MOUNTAIN IMMIGRANT ADVOCACY NETWORK ↗
- Who funds Mercy Ships International ↗
- Who funds HUNGER FREE COLORADO ↗
- Who funds NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND INC ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND 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: The Denver Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · Anschutz Family Foundation · Rose Community Foundation · The Colorado Health Foundation · The Janus Henderson Foundation · Mile High United Way Inc · Schlessman Foundation Inc · Boettcher Foundation · The Anschutz Foundation · The Colorado Trust · Western Union 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 Raphael Levy Memorial 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 Raphael Levy Memorial Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Raphael Levy Memorial 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.