Skip to content
Saponas Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Saponas Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$78k
Granted FY2024still arriving
21
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$32k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Education$122kHousing & Shelter$55kHuman Services$28kYouth Development$13kArts & Culture$11kAnimals$8kCivil Rights$7kHealth$7kOther$0
02FY2024 · 21 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 21 grants below total $68,700, the rows itemized in this filing. The $78,200 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $9,500 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 $10k20 grants · $37k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $32k
$1,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CU Foundation$31,500
Pikes Peak Habitat for Humanity$7,000
The Place$7,000
Inside/Out Youth Services$3,000
Out Loud Colo Spgs Men's Chorus$3,000
Springs Rescue Mission$2,500
Trails & Open Space Coalition$2,000
TESSA$1,000
National Mill Dog Rescue$1,000
Safe Harbor Lab Rescue$1,000
Westside Cares$1,000
Colorado Springs World Affairs Council$1,000
Eastern Plains Community Pantry$1,000
Assoc for Frontotemporal Dementias$1,000
Early Connections Learning Centers$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 (FY20–20, $8k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 5%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 5%The Place: $5k → 9%Springs Rescue Mission: $2k → 9%TESSA: $1k → 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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$254k · 21 repeat orgs$12k to everyone else

21 repeat relationships: 21 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
9

Total granted

$254k
$12k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+33%
+83%

Still filing today

76%
44%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

50%100%’20’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’22’23’24
Human ServicesEducationYouth DevelopmentHealthAnimalsFood & NutritionOther
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

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION
    4× · 2020–2024 · $122k · revenue +76%
  • PP
    PIKES PEAK HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
    4× · 2020–2024 · $27k · revenue +37%
  • TP
    The Place
    4× · 2020–2024 · $26k · revenue +323%

Funded once

  • MG
    Mercy's Gate
    one grant, 2020 · $4k · revenue -5%
  • TO
    Trails & Opens Space Coalition
    one grant, 2020 · $2k
  • TG
    The Gazette-El Pomar Foundation Empty Stocking Fnd
    one grant, 2020 · $2k
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
Homeward Pikes Peak

Homeward Pikes Peak empowers individuals and families to access stable housing, increase mental health, recovery, and economic stability.

Housing & Shelter
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
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
4
Colorado Coalition for the Homeless

The mission of the colorado coalition for the homeless is to work collaboratively toward the prevention of homelessness and the creation of lasting solutions for families, children, and individuals who are experiencing or at-risk of…

Human Services
5
Humane Society of the Pikes Peak Region

To offer compassionate care to animals, support safe communities, and provide socially conscious sheltering. (continued on schedule o)

Animals
6
Pueblo Rescue Mission

Because of our love for God, we extend his mercy as we strive to empower and improve the lives of unsheltered adults in Pueblo, CO, through provisions of food, shelter and navigational support services.

—
7
Colorado Physician Health Program Corporation

The mission of the Colorado Physician Health Program Corporation is to promote the health and well-being of physicians and physician assistants through evaluation, treatment referral, support education and research.

Health
8
The Pinon Project

The Pinon Project Family Resource Center strengthens our community by providing comprehensive services for children and families.

Human Services
9
Colorado Casa Inc

Colorado CASA is a nonprofit organization that works to strengthen local CASA organizations and advocate for children in the child welfare system.

Civil Rights
10
Center for Nonprofit Excellence

The Center for Nonprofit Excellence strengthens Southern Colorado's nonprofit sector through leadership and resource development, advocacy and collaboration. Together, with our partners, we are co-creating a vibrant community in the Pikes…

—
11
Tu Casa Incorporated

To support healthy violence-free lives and relationships for all children and adults in the San Luis Valley by providing crisis intervention services advocacy and counseling for victims and survivors of domestic and sexual violence.

—
12
Colorado Village Collaborative

Empowering community, enacting change. colorado village collaborative exists to bridge the gap between the streets and stable housing by creating and operating transformational shelter communities in partnership with people experiencing…

Housing & Shelter
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Pikes Peak Habitat for Humanity; the most unlike its peers is National Mill Dog Rescue. 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

20 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. 20 of the 30 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)
20/20
Grantees still filing
16/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION: $122,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATIONPIKES PEAK HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $27,000 · OtherPIKES PEAK HABITAT FOR HUMANITYOut Loud Colo Spgs Men's Chorus: $8,300 · OtherOut Loud Colo Spgs Men's ChorusFamily Promise: $4,000 · OtherWESTSIDE CARES INC: $4,000 · OtherBig Brothers Big Sisters: $3,000 · OtherCALVARY UNITED METHODIST CHURCH: $2,900 · OtherEASTERN PLAINS COMMUNITY PANTRY FOU: $4,000 · OtherNational Mill Dog Rescue: $4,000 · OtherROCK LEDGE RANCH LIVING HISTORY: $3,000 · OtherCOLORADO SPRINGS WORLD AFFAIRS COUNCIL: $2,750 · Other+10 more: $12,600 · Other+10 moreThe Place: $26,000 · Human ServicesThe PlaceTHE SPRINGS RESCUE MISSION: $9,500 · Human ServicesTHE SPRINGS RESCUE …TESSA: $4,000 · Human ServicesTESSAMercy's Gate: $3,500 · Human ServicesMercy's GateCOLORADO SPRINGS CHILD NURSERY CENTERS INC: $2,000 · Human ServicesINSIDE OUT YOUTH SERVICES: $8,500 · Youth DevelopmentTrails and Open Space Coalition: $7,000 · Civil RightsTHE ASSOCIATION FOR FRONTOTEMPORAL DEGENERATION: $4,000 · HealthSAFE HARBOR LAB RESCUE: $4,000 · Animals
Education$122,000Other$75,550Human Services$45,000Youth Development$8,500Civil Rights$7,000Health$4,000Animals$4,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION: $122,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetPIKES PEAK HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $27,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetThe Place: $26,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetTHE SPRINGS RESCUE MISSION: $9,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetINSIDE OUT YOUTH SERVICES: $8,500 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetTrails and Open Space Coalition: $7,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetTHE ASSOCIATION FOR FRONTOTEMPORAL DEGENERATION: $4,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetSAFE HARBOR LAB RESCUE: $4,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetTESSA: $4,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetWESTSIDE CARES INC: $4,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetEASTERN PLAINS COMMUNITY PANTRY FOU: $4,000 over 4y, 1.1% of budgetNational Mill Dog Rescue: $4,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMercy's Gate: $3,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetROCK LEDGE RANCH LIVING HISTORY: $3,000 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetCOLORADO SPRINGS WORLD AFFAIRS COUNCIL: $2,750 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetCHRISTIAN HEALING NETWORK dba Mission Medical Center: $2,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetCOLORADO SPRINGS CHILD NURSERY CENTERS INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPartners in Housing Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetForge Evolution: $500 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds PIKES PEAK HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ↗
  • Who funds The Place ↗
  • Who funds THE SPRINGS RESCUE MISSION ↗
  • Who funds INSIDE OUT YOUTH SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds Trails and Open Space Coalition ↗
  • Who funds THE ASSOCIATION FOR FRONTOTEMPORAL DEGENERATION ↗
  • Who funds SAFE HARBOR LAB RESCUE ↗
  • Who funds TESSA ↗
  • Who funds WESTSIDE CARES INC ↗
  • Who funds EASTERN PLAINS COMMUNITY PANTRY FOU ↗
  • Who funds National Mill Dog Rescue ↗
  • Who funds Mercy's Gate ↗
  • Who funds ROCK LEDGE RANCH LIVING HISTORY ↗
  • Who funds COLORADO SPRINGS WORLD AFFAIRS COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds CHRISTIAN HEALING NETWORK dba Mission Medical Center ↗
  • Who funds COLORADO SPRINGS CHILD NURSERY CENTERS INC ↗
  • Who funds KIDS ON BIKES INC ↗
  • Who funds Partners in Housing Inc ↗
  • Who funds Forge Evolution ↗

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.

El Pomar FoundationPikes Peak Community …Colorado Springs Heal…The Joseph Henry Edmo…Pikes Peak United WayINDYGIVE DBA Give Pik…Colorado Gives Founda…The Marson FoundationThe Myron Stratton Ho…Carl W & Carrie Mae J…T Rowe Price Foundati…Mile High United Way …
El Pomar FoundationCO35.5× affinity15 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: El Pomar Foundation · Pikes Peak Community Foundation · Colorado Springs Health Foundation · The Joseph Henry Edmondson Foundation · Pikes Peak United Way · INDYGIVE DBA Give Pikes Peak · Colorado Gives Foundation · The Marson Foundation · The Myron Stratton Home · Carl W & Carrie Mae Joslyn Charitable Trust · T Rowe Price Foundation · Mile High United Way Inc

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 Saponas Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Saponas Foundation. 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%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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.

    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 30 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.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $88k of grant expense with no grantee named in the published copy. A private foundation itemizes every grant it makes, so a return carrying none has filed its list as an attachment that the public copy does not include. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Saponas’ 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