Skip to content
Real Solutions Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Real Solutions Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$1k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$1k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0197% 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$21kHealth$12kEducation$6kPhilanthropy$3kReligion$700Youth Development$530Crime & Legal$250Housing & Shelter$150Other$0
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$115k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$1,000
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 (FY17–23, $21k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 5% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%A Precious Child: $20k → 5%A Little Help: $300 → 12%Colorado Organization for Victim Assist: $250 → 12%Little Help: $250 → 12%A Little Help: $150 → 12%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.

39%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$16k · 6 repeat orgs$25k to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
13

Total granted

$16k
$25k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+18%
+38%

Still filing today

50%
54%

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 ServicesYouth DevelopmentHealthEducationHousing & ShelterEnvironmentOther
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

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    6× · 2019–2024 · $9k
  • CU
    CARROLL UNIVERSITY INC
    3× · 2017–2020 · $4k · revenue +18%
  • DE
    Denver East High School
    3× · 2018–2020 · $2k

Funded once

  • AP
    A PRECIOUS CHILD INC
    one grant, 2023 · $20k · revenue +4%
  • SJ
    St Judes Research Hospital
    one grant, 2019 · $3k
  • TU
    Trinity United Methodist Church
    one grant, 2021 · $500
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
Girls Incorporated of Metro Denver

To inspire all girls to be strong, smart, and bold.

Youth Development
2
Colorado Center On Law and Policy

Colorado center on law and policy is an antipoverty organization advancing the rights of every coloradan.

Crime & Legal
3
Girl Scouts of Utah

Girl scouting builds girls of courage, confidence and character who make the world a better place.

Youth Development
4
Aia Colorado

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…

—
5
Girl Scouts - Arizona Cactus-Pine Council Inc

Girl scouting builds girls of courage, confidence, and character, who make the world a better place.

Youth Development
6
Colorado Legal Services

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.

Crime & Legal
7
Colorado Wellness Center for Girls
—
8
Girl Scouts of Texas Oklahoma Plains Inc

Building girls of courage, confidence, and character, who make the world a better place.

Youth Development
9
Colorado Nonprofit Association

Colorado nonprofit association strengthens colorado's nonprofits through education, connection and advocacy.

Community Improvement
10
Girl Scouts of Maine

Girl scouting builds girls of courage, confidence, and character, who make the world a better place. at girl scouts of maine over 5,000 girls from across the state are reaching their fullest potential. our girls are discovering what's…

Youth Development
11
Sos Outreach

Sos outreach changes young lives, building character and leadership in underserved kids through mentoring outdoors.

Recreation & Sports
12
Careerwise Colorado

Careerwise's mission is to forge pathways to meaningful careers through bold advocacy, innovative apprenticeships, and industry led partnerships, creating a dynamic talent ecosystem that connects ambition to opportunity for empowered young…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Colorado Gives Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Urban Peak Denver. 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

11 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. 11 of the 20 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)
11/11
Grantees still filing
10/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

A PRECIOUS CHILD INC: $20,000 · Human ServicesA PRECIOUS CHILD INCA LITTLE HELP: $700 · Human Services+1 more: $250 · Human ServicesIndividual grant recipient: $8,750 · OtherIndividual grant recipientSt Judes Research Hospital: $2,975 · OtherSt Judes Research HospitalDenver East High School: $2,280 · OtherDenver East High School+6 more: $1,643 · Other+6 moreCARROLL UNIVERSITY INC: $3,500 · EducationCOLORADO GIVES FOUNDATION: $2,908 · PhilanthropyCANCER LEAGUE OF COLORADO INC: $750 · HealthGIRLS ON THE RUN OF THE ROCKIES: $250 · Youth DevelopmentGIRL SCOUTS OF COLORADO: $250 · Youth DevelopmentSTAND FOR THE SILENT INC: $30 · Youth DevelopmentURBAN PEAK DENVER: $150 · Housing & ShelterNATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION: $20 · Environment
Human Services$20,950Other$15,648Education$3,500Philanthropy$2,908Health$750Youth Development$530Housing & Shelter$150Environment$20

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetA PRECIOUS CHILD INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCARROLL UNIVERSITY INC: $3,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCOLORADO GIVES FOUNDATION: $2,908 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCANCER LEAGUE OF COLORADO INC: $750 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetA LITTLE HELP: $700 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetCOLORADO ORGANIZATION FOR VICTIMS'S ASSISTANCE: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN OF THE ROCKIES: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGIRL SCOUTS OF COLORADO: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetURBAN PEAK DENVER: $150 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSTAND FOR THE SILENT INC: $30 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION: $20 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

Colorado Gives Founda…Xcel Energy FoundationThe Anschutz Foundati…El Pomar FoundationThe Denver FoundationEnterprise Holdings F…The Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Colorado Gives FoundationCO17× affinity6 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Colorado Gives Foundation · Xcel Energy Foundation · The Anschutz Foundation · El Pomar Foundation · The Denver Foundation · Enterprise Holdings Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving 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 Real Solutions Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Real Solutions Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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 Real Solutions Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Real Solutions 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 20 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Real Solutions’ 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