Skip to content
Redirect at a glance

· Private foundation

Redirect

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.

$156k
Granted FY2024still arriving
32
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$16k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0188% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Community Improvement$84kEnvironment$75kPhilanthropy$63kReligion$59kHuman Services$59kCivil Rights$50kYouth Development$35kEducation$26kOther$0
02FY2024 · 32 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k24 grants · $70k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $86k
$3,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$3.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
VOLUNTEER CENTER OF CEDAR VALLEY$16,000
JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT OF EASTERN IOWA$10,000
RUSTIC ROOTS SANCTUARY$10,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
FOREST RELEAF OF MISSOURI$10,000
PERENNIAL$10,000
MISSOURI GATEWAY GREEN BUILDING COU$10,000
URBAN HARVEST STL$10,000
EASTERN IOWA HEALTH CENTER$5,000
CASA OF JEFFERSON & GILPIN COUNTIES$5,000
JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE CENTER$5,000
DENVER ZOOLOGICAL FOUNDATION$5,000
A PRECIOUS CHILD$5,000
PRAIRIE RIDGE FOUNDATION$3,000
BOULDER JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER$3,000
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 (FY21–24, $29k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 21% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%DAY BY DAY WARMING SHELTER: $3k → 11%A PRECIOUS CHILD: $15k → 5%BOULDER JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $3k → 12%A PRECIOUS CHILD: $5k → 5%CATHERINE MCAULEY CENTER: $3k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

ID
IL
WI
MI
MA
SD
IA
IN
OH
NJ
CA
CO
MO
NC
FL
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.

49%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$336k · 28 repeat orgs$344k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +26% since the first grant, against +17% for those funded once.

28 repeat relationships: 14 still active in FY2024, 14 since wound down; 18 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

28
30

Total granted

$336k
$222k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+26%
+17%

Still filing today

54%
27%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 22% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $122k 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
Community ImprovementYouth DevelopmentHuman ServicesEnvironmentPhilanthropyAnimalsOther
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

  • CR
    COMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTER INC
    4× · 2017–2020 · $25k · revenue +26%
  • AS
    ART STUDENTS LEAGUE OF DENVER
    3× · 2018–2020 · $20k · revenue +40%
  • AP
    A PRECIOUS CHILD INC
    2× · 2021–2024 · $20k · revenue +32%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $17k
  • UW
    UNITED WAY OF WASHTENAW COUNTY
    one grant, 2021 · $15k · revenue -89%
  • JC
    JERSEY CARES INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $15k · revenue +27%
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
Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc

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…

Community Improvement
2
Denver Botanic Gardens Inc

The mission of denver botanic gardens is to connect people with plants, especially plants from the rocky mountain region and similar regions around the world, providing delight and enlightenment to everyone.

Environment
3
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
4
Urban Land Conservancy

Urban land conservancy's mission is to acquire, develop, and/or preserve community assets in urban areas for a variety of community needs especially in high poverty, low-income, underserved, at-risk communities.

Community Improvement
5
Cultivate Kansas City Inc

Grow food, farms and community in support of a sustainable, healthy and local food system.

Food & Nutrition
6
United Way of East Central Iowa

Unite the caring power of communities to invest in effective solutions to improve people's lives.

Philanthropy
7
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…

—
8
Habitat for Humanity of Metro Denver Inc

Seeking to put god's love into action, habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, communities and hope.

—
9
Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce

The denver metro chamber of commerce is the architect of tomorrow, igniting change and driving progress to build dynamic economies and communities. we champion innovation, forge powerful partnerships, and relentlessly advocate for our…

—
10
Colorado Center On Law and Policy

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

Crime & Legal
11
Common Good Iowa

Common good iowa engages iowans to create and advocate for research-based public policy that makes life better and more equitable for all who make iowa home.

—
12
The Food Bank for Central & Northeast Missouri

The food bank for central & northeast missouri is a regional disaster and hunger relief network that acquires and distributes millions of meals each year to help neighbors get the food they need to thrive. (continued on schedule o)the…

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mile High United Way Inc; the most unlike its peers is St Louis Earth Day. 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

36 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. 36 of the 76 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
36/36
Grantees still filing
18/36
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SPARK THE CHANGE: $44,750 · OtherSPARK THE CHANGECOLORADO ALLIANCE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL: $24,250 · OtherART STUDENTS LEAGUE OF DENVER: $20,000 · OtherMETROVOLUNTEERS: $19,750 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $17,420 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $16,000 · Other+50 more: $320,304 · Other+50 moreCOMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTER INC: $25,250 · Community ImprovementCOMMUNITY …VOLUNTEER CENTER OF CEDAR VALLEY: $16,000 · Community ImprovementVOLUNTEER …COLORADO NONPROFIT ASSOCIATION: $15,000 · Community ImprovementCOLORADO N…MOUNTAIN RESOURCE CENTER: $5,000 · Community ImprovementMOUNTAIN R…COMMUNITY SHARES OF COLORADO INC: $25,250 · PhilanthropyUNITED WAY OF CENTRAL ILLINOIS INC: $15,000 · PhilanthropyMILE HIGH UNITED WAY INC: $5,000 · PhilanthropyPERENNIAL: $10,000 · EnvironmentSt Louis Earth Day: $10,000 · EnvironmentFOREST RELEAF OF MISSOURI: $10,000 · EnvironmentRUSTIC ROOTS SANCTUARY CO: $10,000 · EnvironmentJUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT OF EASTERN IOWA INC: $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentYOUTH EMPLOYMENT ACADEMY: $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentSTL YOUTH JOBS: $7,500 · Youth DevelopmentINSIDE OUT YOUTH SERVICES: $5,000 · Youth DevelopmentA PRECIOUS CHILD INC: $20,000 · Human ServicesTHE BOULDER JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $3,000 · Human ServicesDAY BY DAY SHELTER INC: $3,000 · Human ServicesCATHERINE MCAULEY CENTER INC: $2,500 · Human ServicesURBAN HARVEST STL: $10,000 · Food & Nutrition
Other$462,474Community Improvement$61,250Philanthropy$45,250Environment$40,000Youth Development$32,500Human Services$28,500Food & Nutrition$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCOMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTER INC: $25,250 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetCOMMUNITY SHARES OF COLORADO INC: $25,250 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetART STUDENTS LEAGUE OF DENVER: $20,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetA PRECIOUS CHILD INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetMETROVOLUNTEERS: $19,750 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetVOLUNTEER CENTER OF CEDAR VALLEY: $16,000 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetUNITED WAY OF WASHTENAW COUNTY: $15,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetJERSEY CARES INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetUNITED WAY OF CENTRAL ILLINOIS INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCOLORADO NONPROFIT ASSOCIATION: $15,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetHANDSON SUBURBAN CHICAGO: $15,000 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetPERENNIAL: $10,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetWILLIS DADY EMERGENCY SHELTER INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSt Louis Earth Day: $10,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetFOREST RELEAF OF MISSOURI: $10,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetMISSOURI GATEWAY GREEN BUILDING COUNCIL: $10,000 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetJUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT OF EASTERN IOWA INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetYOUTH EMPLOYMENT ACADEMY: $10,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetTHE PARK PEOPLE: $10,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetRUSTIC ROOTS SANCTUARY CO: $10,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetURBAN HARVEST STL: $10,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetSTL YOUTH JOBS: $7,500 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetDENISON UNIVERSITY: $5,383 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCASA OF JEFFERSON AND GILPIN COUNTIES: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetDENVER ZOOLOGICAL FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMILE HIGH UNITED WAY INC: $5,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEASTERN IOWA HEALTH CENTER: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMOUNTAIN RESOURCE CENTER: $5,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetINSIDE OUT YOUTH SERVICES: $5,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $5,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetTANAGER PLACE: $5,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE BOULDER JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRACINE ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetDAY BY DAY SHELTER INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCATHERINE MCAULEY CENTER INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHELPLINE CENTER INC: $500 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.

The Denver FoundationRose Community Founda…Colorado Gives Founda…Xcel Energy FoundationThe Colorado Health F…St Louis Community Fo…Carleen and Eugene Gr…The Hall-Perrine Foun…United Fire Group Fou…Trio Foundation of St…Boettcher FoundationAnschutz Family Found…
The Denver FoundationCO22.6× affinity10 shared granteesties to 9 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Denver Foundation · Rose Community Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · Xcel Energy Foundation · The Colorado Health Foundation · St Louis Community Foundation Inc · Carleen and Eugene Grandon Charitable Foundation · The Hall-Perrine Foundation · United Fire Group Foundation · Trio Foundation of St Louis · Boettcher Foundation · Anschutz Family 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 Redirect funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Redirect. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 6%
  • Jersey Cares Inc: 6% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
15report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
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 Redirect?

Find your warmest path to Redirect 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 76 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 Redirect’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