Skip to content
Shelley Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Shelley Foundation Inc

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.

$60k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$40k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Health$301kEducation$102kHuman Services$70kPhilanthropy$39kYouth Development$3kRecreation & Sports$2kCrime & Legal$2kAnimals$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$40,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$69k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
EATING DISORDER FOUNDATION$40,000
KARIS COMMUNITY$20,000
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 (FY17–19, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%GREATER GREEN BAY YMCA: $500 → 10%GREATER GREEN BAY YMCA: $500 → 10%GREATER GREEN BAY YMCA: $500 → 10%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

MN
IL
WI
NY
CA
CO
NC
DC
GA
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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$447k · 12 repeat orgs$44k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +58% since the first grant, against +18% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
21

Total granted

$447k
$44k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+58%
+18%

Still filing today

58%
57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
HealthEducationPublic BenefitHuman ServicesAnimalsRecreation & 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

  • TE
    The Eating Disorder Foundation
    8× · 2018–2025 · $284k · revenue +58%
  • HP
    HIGH POINT UNIVERSITY
    2× · 2017–2018 · $75k · revenue +89%
  • DR
    DENVER RESCUE MISSION
    5× · 2017–2023 · $6k · revenue +57%

Funded once

  • MH
    MULLEN HIGH SCHOOL
    one grant, 2017 · $20k
  • SH
    SYNAPSE HOUSE
    one grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue 0%
  • AJ
    ARRUPE JESUIT HIGH SCHOOL
    one grant, 2022 · $4k
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
Union Health System

To serve our communities by provding innovative and compassionate healthcare.

Health
3
Colorado Museum of Natural History

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

Arts & Culture
4
California Dental Association

The california dental association is committed to the success of our members in service to their patients and the public.

Community Improvement
5
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.

—
6
People Inc

People inc. provides health and human services that enrich lives and communities through innovation and supportive services. with a goal to help people achieve greater independence and quality of life, people inc. provides day,…

Human Services
7
United States Olympic and Paralympic Committee

Empowering the competitive excellence and well-being of team usa athletes, championing the power of sport, and inspiring the nation.

Recreation & Sports
8
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
9
Public Broadcasting of Colorado Inc

To deliver meaningful news, music, and cultural experiences to everyone in colorado using the power of the human voice in all its forms

Arts & Culture
10
Association of Clinical Research Professionals

Acrp promotes excellence in clinical research. we support clinical research professionals through training and development, the exchange of ideas and expertise, and certification. we serve as the preferred source for quality tools,…

Health
11
Neurology Associates of Stony Brook University Faculty Practice Corp

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
12
American Academy of Neurology

The Academy's mission is to enhance member career fulfillment and promote brain health for all.

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Colorado Gives Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Denver Zoological Foundation. 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

21 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. 21 of the 35 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)
21/21
Grantees still filing
16/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

The Eating Disorder Foundation: $283,885 · HealthThe Eating Disorder Foundation+6 more: $5,348 · HealthKARIS COMMUNITY: $62,556 · OtherKARIS COMMUNITYMULLEN HIGH SCHOOL: $20,000 · OtherMULLEN HIGH SCHOOLMAYO CLINIC FOUNDATION: $7,000 · OtherMAYO CLINIC FOUNDATIONARRUPE JESUIT HIGH SCHOOL: $4,000 · Other+14 more: $16,850 · Other+14 moreHIGH POINT UNIVERSITY: $75,000 · EducationHIGH POINT UNIVE…+2 more: $1,300 · EducationCOLORADO GIVES FOUNDATION: $31,000 · Philanthropy+1 more: $1,000 · PhilanthropyDENVER RESCUE MISSION: $6,000 · Human ServicesGREATER GREEN BAY YMCA INC: $1,500 · Human ServicesSYNAPSE HOUSE: $5,000 · Public BenefitA Sanctuary for Military Families Inc DBA Project Sanctuary: $300 · Public BenefitSober Apartment Living CO: $2,000 · Crime & Legal
Health$289,233Other$110,406Education$76,300Philanthropy$32,000Human Services$7,500Public Benefit$5,300Crime & Legal$2,000

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 budgetThe Eating Disorder Foundation: $283,885 over 8y, 16% of budgetHIGH POINT UNIVERSITY: $75,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetKARIS COMMUNITY: $62,556 over 6y, 4.0% of budgetCOLORADO GIVES FOUNDATION: $31,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetDENVER RESCUE MISSION: $6,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetSYNAPSE HOUSE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetRobbies Hope Foundation: $2,598 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetSober Apartment Living CO: $2,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetGREATER GREEN BAY YMCA INC: $1,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetDENVER POST COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDenver Pet Partners: $1,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetEINSTEIN PROJECT INC: $1,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPANCREATIC CANCER ACTION NETWORK INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCEREBRAL PALSY INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetREGIS UNIVERSITY: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMORRIS ANIMAL FOUNDATION: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDENVER ZOOLOGICAL FOUNDATION: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF WISCONSIN INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSPECIAL OLYMPICS INC: $200 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…K C Stock Foundation …Cornerstone Foundatio…George Kress Foundati…Xcel Energy FoundationArthur J Gallagher Fo…AbbVie FoundationBaird Foundation IncThe Bank of America C…National Philanthropi…Natl Christian Charit…Vanguard Charitable E…
Colorado Gives FoundationCO18.5× affinity7 shared granteesties to 9 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Colorado Gives Foundation · K C Stock Foundation Inc · Cornerstone Foundation of Northeastern Wisconsin Inc · George Kress Foundation Inc · Xcel Energy Foundation · Arthur J Gallagher Foundation · AbbVie Foundation · Baird Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program

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 Shelley Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Shelley Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%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 · 0–40%
    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 35 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 Shelley’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