Skip to content
Scharp Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Scharp Family 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.

$19k
Granted FY2024still arriving
18
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$7k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0192% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$86kAnimals$28kEducation$24kHuman Services$9kCrime & Legal$750Health$200Youth Development$200Housing & Shelter$150Other$0
02FY2024 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$500
Median grant
4
States reached
$420k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Fellowship of Christ$6,500
Colorado School of Mines$3,000
Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation$2,000
Savio$1,000
Tri-Lakes Cares$1,000
Deer Creek Middle School$900
Morris Animal Foundation$600
Tri-Lakes United Methodist Church$500
Pheasants Forever$500
Golden Retriever Rescue Rockies$400
Illuminate Colorado$400
CSU - Flint Animal Cancer Center$400
Colorado State University Foundation$250
Goldberg Law Center PC$250
National Mill Dog Rescue$200
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 (FY17–24, $7k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%TESSA of Colorado Springs: $100 → 9%TESSA of Colorado Springs: $100 → 9%Tri-Lakes Cares: $2k → 9%Tri-Lakes Cares: $2k → 9%Tri-Lakes Cares: $1k → 9%Tri-Lakes Cares: $1k → 9%Tri-Lakes Cares: $800 → 9%Tri-Lakes Cares: $600 → 9%Tri-Lakes Cares: $500 → 9%Tri-Lakes Cares: $200 → 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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$150k · 16 repeat orgs$3k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +113% since the first grant, against +3% for those funded once.

16 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
3

Total granted

$150k
$750

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+113%
+3%

Still filing today

38%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k 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 ServicesAnimalsYouth DevelopmentEnvironmentEducationRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • TC
    TRI-LAKES CARES
    8× · 2017–2024 · $7k · revenue +235%
  • MA
    MORRIS ANIMAL FOUNDATION
    8× · 2017–2024 · $3k · revenue +73%
  • GR
    GOLDEN RETRIEVER RESCUE OF THE ROCKIES
    8× · 2017–2024 · $2k · revenue +113%

Funded once

  • VO
    VICTIM OUTREACH INC
    one grant, 2023 · $500 · revenue 0%
  • EP
    El Paso County Homeless Veterans Coaliti
    one grant, 2018 · $150
  • SF
    SME FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $100 · revenue +3%
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
Colorado Animal Rescue Inc

C.A.R.E's mission is practicing excellence in the animal care, education, and advocacy to connect pets to their people.

Animals
2
Dogs Unbroken

Dog Rescue Dogs Unbroken supports Colorado dogs at higher risk for euthanasia evaluating their behavioral stability and applying training methods appropriate for their needs. The goal of helping each dog learn to make good choices in…

Animals
3
Colorado Veterinary Medical Association

To advance veterinary medicine.

—
4
Colorado Museum of Natural History

Be a catalyst! Ignite our community's passion for nature and science.

Arts & Culture
5
Colorado Organization for Victims's Assistance

The organization provides training, resources, and support for victims of crime and the professionals who serve them.

Human Services
6
Animal Rescue of the Rockies

Animal Care and Adoption - ARR's mission is to save the lives of homeless and abandoned dogs and cats. Our goal is reaching a no-kill society in the United States.

Animals
7
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
8
Colorado Gives Foundation

We connect people, ideas, and nonprofits to make good happen. our vision is that all of jeffco is thriving.

Philanthropy
9
K-9 Search and Rescue Inc

K9 search and resuce operations

Public Safety & Disaster
10
Silicon Valley Pet Project

Silicon valley pet project (svpp) is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization committed to saving local at-risk shelter pets through rescue, community involvement and education.

Animals
11
Retrieve a Golden of Minnesota (Ragom) Inc

Retrieve a golden of the midwest (ragom) rescues, fosters, and rehomes golden retrievers and golden mixes that can no longer remain in their current environments. the organization ensures each dog receives necessary veterinary care and…

Animals
12
Paws On the Ground Colorado

dog rescue and adoption

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Morris Animal Foundation; 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

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 26 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
7/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TRI-LAKES UNITED METHODIST CHURCH: $73,000 · OtherTRI-LAKES UNITED METHODIST CHURCHColorado School of Mines: $16,500 · OtherColorado School of MinesRocky Mountain Elk Foundation: $14,500 · OtherRocky Mountain Elk FoundationFELLOWSHIP OF CHRIST: $12,500 · OtherFELLOWSHIP OF CHRISTPheasants Forever: $6,500 · OtherSavio: $4,700 · Other+10 more: $9,950 · Other+10 moreTRI-LAKES CARES: $7,100 · Human ServicesVICTIM OUTREACH INC: $500 · Human Services+1 more: $200 · Human ServicesMORRIS ANIMAL FOUNDATION: $2,850 · AnimalsGOLDEN RETRIEVER RESCUE OF THE ROCKIES: $1,800 · AnimalsIlluminate Colorado: $1,600 · Youth DevelopmentSTAR GIRLZ EMPOWERMENT INC: $200 · Youth DevelopmentCOLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $250 · EducationNational Mill Dog Rescue: $200 · Recreation & SportsSME FOUNDATION: $100 · Environment
Other$137,650Human Services$7,800Animals$4,650Youth Development$1,800Education$250Recreation & Sports$200Environment$100

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 budgetTRI-LAKES CARES: $7,100 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetMORRIS ANIMAL FOUNDATION: $2,850 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetGOLDEN RETRIEVER RESCUE OF THE ROCKIES: $1,800 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetIlluminate Colorado: $1,600 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetVICTIM OUTREACH INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSTAR GIRLZ EMPOWERMENT INC: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTESSA: $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNational Mill Dog Rescue: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSME FOUNDATION: $100 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.

  • Who funds TRI-LAKES CARES ↗
  • Who funds Coronado Elementary PTA ↗
  • Who funds MORRIS ANIMAL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds GOLDEN RETRIEVER RESCUE OF THE ROCKIES ↗
  • Who funds Illuminate Colorado ↗
  • Who funds VICTIM OUTREACH INC ↗
  • Who funds COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds STAR GIRLZ EMPOWERMENT INC ↗
  • Who funds TESSA ↗
  • Who funds National Mill Dog Rescue ↗
  • Who funds SME FOUNDATION ↗

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…The Colorado Health F…Verizon FoundationNetwork for GoodNatl Christian Charit…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Colorado Gives FoundationCO16.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Colorado Gives Foundation · The Colorado Health Foundation · Verizon Foundation · Network for Good · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Scharp Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Scharp Family 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%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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.

    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 26 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 Scharp Family’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