Skip to content
Scoma Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Scoma 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.

$1.1M
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$1.1M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Philanthropy$1.1MHealth$85kFood & Nutrition$69kRecreation & Sports$56kInternational$45kArts & Culture$1kEducation$600Crime & Legal$600Other$0
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,050,807
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE SCOMA DONOR ADVISED FUND WITH VANGUARD CHARITA$1,050,807
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 (FY23–24, $20k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES RESOURCE CENTER: $10k → 7%DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES RESOURCE CENTER: $10k → 7%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.

19%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$254k · 5 repeat orgs$1.1M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +19% since the first grant, against +13% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
7

Total granted

$254k
$5k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+19%
+13%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.1M went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Youth DevelopmentEducationRecreation & SportsInternationalArts & CultureHuman ServicesOther
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

  • CF
    COLORADO FUTURE FARMERS OF AMERICA FOUNDATION
    6× · 2019–2024 · $69k · revenue +96%
  • DD
    DEVELOPMENTAL DISABLITIES FOUNDATION INC
    6× · 2017–2022 · $64k · revenue +19% · 94% of their budget
  • YA
    YOUNG AMERICANS CENTER FOR FINANCIAL EDUCATION
    8× · 2017–2024 · $56k · revenue +19%

Funded once

  • RM
    ROCKY MOUNTAIN HONOR FLIGHTgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $1k · revenue +188%
  • JC
    JEFFERSON CENTER FOR MENTAL HEALTH
    one grant, 2020 · $600 · revenue +13%
  • UN
    UCHEALTH NORTHERN COLORADO FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2020 · $600 · revenue +1%
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
The Jefferson Foundation

Jeffco schools foundation vision is "every jeffco student thrives- and mission is "secure resources and engage in partnerships to ensure jeffo students thrive through equitable, excellent, and engaging educational experiences."

Education
2
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…

—
3
Public Education & Business Coalition

Every child deserves a great educator. pebc works across the nation to prepare outstanding new teachers, help practicing teachers and leaders become exceptional, and shape systems and policies in order to foster vibrant growth and lasting…

Education
4
Denver Hybrid College

To support college students in innovative, affordable paths to in-demand careers and financial freedom.

Education
5
Denver Metro Convention & Visitors Bureau

To bring conventions and leisure visitors to denver for the economic benefit of the city, the community, and our partners.

—
6
Mental Health Center of Boulder County Inc

Partnering to improve quality of life as a nonprofit organization dedicated to mental health and wellness. healing is our purpose, help is our promise, health is our passion.

—
7
Fountain Valley School of Colorado

Fountain valley school of colorado provides a transformative curriculum in a supportive environment where students are challenged to think critically, become leaders, and live by our core values: courage, compassion, curiosity,…

Education
8
Denver Early Childhood Council

The vision of denver's early childhood council (the "council") is that denver is a community where the diverse needs of all children and their families are supported. the council elevates the early childhood field through innovative and…

Education
9
Colorado Fiscal Institute

To provide timely, credible and accessible analyses of fiscal and economic issues facing colorado to inform public policy debates and promote economic prosperity

Community Improvement
10
Rocky Mountain Mutual Housing Association Inc

To build brighter futures by investing in resident focused affordable housing and services, empowering individuals and families to thrive.

Housing & Shelter
11
Colorado Agricultural Leadership Program

To develop leaders that will become a strong, unified voice for agricultural issues.

Education
12
Endeavor Colorado

Endeavor colorado is a not-for-profit leading the high-impact entrepreneurship movement in colorado to catalyze long-term economic growth by selecting, mentoring, and supporting the best high-impact entrepreneurs in our region. high-impact…

Community Improvement
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 Rocky Mountain Honor Flight. 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

12 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. 12 of the 13 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
11/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE SCOMA DONOR ADVISED FUND WITH VANGUARD CHARITA: $1,050,807 · OtherTHE SCOMA DONOR ADVISED FUND WITH VANGUARD CHARITA+6 more: $3,600 · OtherCOLORADO FUTURE FARMERS OF AMERICA FOUNDATION: $69,000 · Youth DevelopmentDEVELOPMENTAL DISABLITIES FOUNDATION INC: $64,000 · EducationYOUNG AMERICANS CENTER FOR FINANCIAL EDUCATION: $56,000 · Recreation & SportsJUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT-ROCKY MOUNTAIN INC: $45,100 · InternationalDEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES RESOURCE CENTER: $20,000 · Human ServicesROCKY MOUNTAIN HONOR FLIGHT: $1,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$1,054,407Youth Development$69,000Education$64,000Recreation & Sports$56,000International$45,100Human Services$20,000Arts & Culture$1,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCOLORADO FUTURE FARMERS OF AMERICA FOUNDATION: $69,000 over 6y, 1.5% of budgetDEVELOPMENTAL DISABLITIES FOUNDATION INC: $64,000 over 6y, 94% of budgetYOUNG AMERICANS CENTER FOR FINANCIAL EDUCATION: $56,000 over 8y, 0.4% of budgetJUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT-ROCKY MOUNTAIN INC: $45,100 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetDEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES RESOURCE CENTER: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetROCKY MOUNTAIN HONOR FLIGHT: $1,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetJEFFERSON CENTER FOR MENTAL HEALTH: $600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUCHEALTH NORTHERN COLORADO FOUNDATION: $600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJovial Concepts: $600 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetROCKY MOUNTAIN PREPARATORY SCHOOLS: $600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE COLORADO NONPROFIT DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMILE HIGH UNITED WAY INC: $600 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…The Denver FoundationRose Community Founda…Xcel Energy FoundationAmerican Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Colorado Gives FoundationCO20.9× affinity8 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Colorado Gives Foundation · The Denver Foundation · Rose Community Foundation · Xcel Energy Foundation · 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 Scoma Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Scoma Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 13 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Scoma’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