· Public charity
Roaring Fork Gay & Lesbian Community Fund
To promote tolerance, understanding and diversity through local and national programming, fundraising and grants for the LGBT+ community, their families, and allies, with a focus on youth education, and community action.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 5 grants below total $66,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $108,885 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $42,885 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $6k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $60k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Cook Inclusive | $20,000 |
| Lambda Legal | $20,000 |
| Trans Family Support Services | $10,000 |
| Certainty AKA Sus | $10,000 |
| Andy Zanca Youth Empowerment Program | $6,000 |
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 (FY19–25, $77k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 20% 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.
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 0% for the ones you funded once.
5 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 45% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $36k 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
- AHASPEN HOPE CENTER3× · 2017–2019 · $33k · revenue +420%
- TSTransFamily Support Services3× · 2022–2025 · $30k · revenue +73%
- AFASPEN FILM5× · 2017–2024 · $24k · revenue +41%
Funded once
- TRTHE RYAN PERRY FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2024 · $103k · revenue 0% · 90% of their budget
- FFFRANCESCOS FOUNDATION INCORPORATEDone grant, 2023 · $31k
- PIPRATT INSTITUTEone grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +8%
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 contribute to the visibility and inclusion of diverse sexual orientations, gender identities and expressions, and sex characteristics (sogiesc) communities. to connect, grow, and support pride platforms and networks globally. to assist…
Celebrate cultures of lgbtq+ people
To empower, promote, mentor and connect members of the American and global LGBTQIA communites, and especially members of those communities who identify as transgender, who are active in the film, television, content and media production…
To empower every lgbtq+ person to live as their true self. we envision a future where all lgbtq+ people are valued and celebrated for who they are
To secure equal rights and protections for lgbtq utahns and their families.
The new york city gay and lesbian anti-violence project (avp) mission is to empower lgbtq and hiv-affected communities and allies to end all forms of violence through organizing and education, and support survivors through counseling and…
To create a better future for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (lgbtq+) youth and adults through a partnership of parents, allies, and lgbtq+ people. (see schedule o for detail)
Support education and advocacy for LGBTQ + people and families
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is One Colorado Education Fund and the most unlike its peers is Pratt Institute. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
19 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.
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 RYAN PERRY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ASPEN HOPE CENTER ↗
- Who funds COOK INCLUSIVE COMPANY ↗
- Who funds FRANCESCOS FOUNDATION INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds TransFamily Support Services ↗
- Who funds ASPEN FILM ↗
- Who funds LAMBDA LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUCATION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds TRANSGENDER LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds PRATT INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Unique Womans Coalition ↗
- Who funds TOM OF FINLAND FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CONNECTICUT COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds CERTAINTY ↗
- Who funds Andy Zanca Youth Empowerment Program ↗
- Who funds YOU CAN PLAY ↗
- Who funds POINT FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ONE COLORADO EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL GAY & LESBIAN TRAVEL ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE TYLER CLEMENTI FOUNDATION 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: Aspen Community Foundation · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Network for Good · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile 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 Roaring Fork Gay & Lesbian Community Fund 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Connecticut College — 0% of income from government
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 Roaring Fork Gay & Lesbian Community Fund?
Find your warmest path to Roaring Fork Gay & Lesbian Community Fund 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.