Skip to content
Stonehocker Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Stonehocker Family 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.

$37k
Granted FY2025still arriving
18
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$5k
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.

Human Services$100kHousing & Shelter$72kEducation$50kFood & Nutrition$28kEnvironment$25kHealth$24kArts & Culture$20kInternational$14kOther$0
02FY2025 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$823k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BRENT'S PLACE BRENT ELEY FOUNDATION$5,000
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY$2,500
ALLIANCE FOR CHOICE IN EDUCATION$2,500
NORTHGLENN HISTORIC PRESERVATION FOUNDATION$2,500
HOPE HOUSE OF COLORADO$2,500
RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE$2,500
PROJECT ANGEL HEART$2,500
THERE WITH CARE$2,000
FRIENDS OF BROOMFIELD$2,000
WELD COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$2,000
A LITTLE HELP$2,000
ROCKY MOUNTAIN MS CENTER$2,000
DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS$2,000
ALMOST HOME$1,500
GRAND SENIORS AT MOUNTAIN FAMILY CENTER$1,250
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 (FY17–25, $61k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 77% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%A PRECIOUS CHILD: $2k → 5%FAMILY TREE INC: $3k → 7%A LITTLE HELP: $1k → 11%THERE WITH CARE: $4k → 12%JOSHUA'S STOREHOUSE AND DISTRIBUTIO: $2k → 11%THERE WITH CARE: $3k → 12%JOSHUA'S STOREHOUSE AND DISTRIBUTIO: $2k → 11%THERE WITH CARE: $3k → 12%JOSHUA'S STOREHOUSE AND DISTRIBUTIO: $2k → 11%THERE WITH CARE: $2k → 12%JOSHUA'S STOREHOUSE AND DISTRIBUTIO: $2k → 11%THERE WITH CARE: $2k → 12%JOSHUA'S STOREHOUSE AND DISTRIBUTIO: $2k → 11%THERE WITH CARE: $2k → 12%JOSHUA'S STOREHOUSE AND DISTRIBUTIO: $2k → 11%THERE WITH CARE: $2k → 12%BROOMFIELD FISH: $2k → 5%ASHLEY DOOLITTLE FOUNDATION: $2k → 11%BROOMFIELD FISH: $2k → 5%ASHLEY DOOLITTLE FOUNDATION: $2k → 11%ASHLEY DOOLITTLE FOUNDATION: $2k → 11%BROOMFIELD FISH: $2k → 5%ASHLEY DOOLITTLE FOUNDATION: $2k → 11%ASHLEY DOOLITTLE FOUNDATION: $1k → 11%A PRECIOUS CHILD: $1k → 5%ASHLEY DOOLITTLE FOUNDATION: $1k → 11%A PRECIOUS CHILD: $1k → 5%ASHLEY DOOLITTLE FOUNDATION: $1k → 11%A LITTLE HELP: $2k → 12%A PRECIOUS CHILD: $1k → 5%ASHLEY DOOLITTLE FOUNDATION: $1k → 11%A LITTLE HELP: $2k → 12%A LITTLE HELP: $1k → 12%BROOMFIELD FISH: $1k → 5%A LITTLE HELP: $1k → 12%BROOMFIELD FISH: $1k → 5%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 12% of Stonehocker Family Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 84% of the giving stays in CO; by stated purpose, 80%.

Stonehocker Family Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$307k · 27 repeat orgs$11k to everyone else

27 repeat relationships: 15 still active in FY2025, 12 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

27
6

Total granted

$307k
$10k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+72%
+188%

Still filing today

63%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k 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
Human ServicesHousing & ShelterEducationCrime & LegalArts & CultureRecreation & 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

  • AF
    ALLIANCE FOR CHOICE IN EDUCATION
    9× · 2017–2025 · $34k · revenue +194%
  • TW
    THERE WITH CARE
    7× · 2019–2025 · $17k · revenue +2%
  • AH
    Almost Home Inc
    9× · 2017–2025 · $17k · revenue +338%

Funded once

  • MF
    MOUNTAIN FAMILY CENTER GRAND SENIOR
    one grant, 2023 · $3k
  • FT
    FAMILY TREE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $3k · revenue +43%
  • RM
    ROCKY MOUNTAIN HONOR FLIGHTgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $2k · revenue +188%
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
Fort Collins Habitat for Humanity

Seeking to put god's love into action; habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, communities, and hope to realize our vision of a world where everyone has a decent place to live. fort collins habitat for humanity adheres…

Housing & Shelter
2
United Food Bank

United Food Bank unites communities to alleviate hunger.

Food & Nutrition
3
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
4
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
5
Jeffco Action Center Inc the Action Center

To provide an immediate and compassionate response to those in our community experiencing hardship by offering resources and services to stabilize lives and promote pathways to lasting change.

Unclassified
6
Homeward Bound Inc

Providing innovative and life-enriching services for children, adolescents, and adults with disabilities.

Human Services
7
Sunshine Home Share Colorado

Sunshine home share colorado ensures quality of life for older adults and strengthens communities through a safe home-sharing model, supportive economic empowerment, and connections to resources and services.

Housing & Shelter
8
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.

—
9
Impact Development Fund

Impact development fund helps people within our underserved communities seek fulfillment for themselves and their families by providing access to affordable living. we create these opportunities by delivering flexible capital to nonprofit…

Housing & Shelter
10
America's Second Harvest of the Big Bend Inc

To advance change by feeding the hungry and educating and engaging the community in the fight to end hunger.

Food & Nutrition
11
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
12
Authoracare Collective

Authoracare collective empowers people to be active participants in their care journey, enabling them to live on their own terms through personalized support for mind, body, and spirit.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is A Precious Child 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.
05the grantee network

22 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. 22 of the 36 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/22
Grantees still filing
18/22
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BRENT'S PLACE BRENT ELEY FOUNDATION: $43,750 · OtherBRENT'S PLACE BRENT ELEY FOUNDATIONTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $24,500 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYRONALD MCDONALD HOUSE: $18,750 · OtherRONALD MCDONALD HOUSENORTHGLENN HISTORIC PRESERVATION FOUNDATION INC: $17,750 · OtherNORTHGLENN HISTORIC PRESERVATION FOUNDATION INCTEF BERTHOUD SCHOOLS FUND: $16,100 · OtherTEF BERTHOUD SCHOOLS FUNDRONALD MCDONDALD HOUSE: $9,500 · OtherROCKY MOUNTAIN MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS CENTER: $8,500 · OtherGRAND SENIORS MOUNTAIN FAMILY CENTER: $7,000 · Other+13 more: $33,750 · Other+13 moreTHERE WITH CARE: $17,250 · Human ServicesTHERE WITH CAREHOPE HOUSE OF COLORADO: $13,250 · Human ServicesHOPE HOUSE OF COLORADOJoshuas Storehouse and Distribution Center: $12,000 · Human ServicesJoshuas Storehouse and Di…ASHLEY DOOLITTLE FOUNDATION: $10,400 · Human ServicesASHLEY DOOLITTLE FOUNDATI…A LITTLE HELP: $7,000 · Human ServicesA LITTLE HELPCOMMUNITY SERVICES OF BROOMFIELD: $6,750 · Human ServicesCOMMUNITY SERVICES OF BRO…A PRECIOUS CHILD INC: $5,000 · Human ServicesA PRECIOUS CHILD INCWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $4,000 · Human Services+1 more: $2,500 · Human ServicesALLIANCE FOR CHOICE IN EDUCATION: $33,500 · EducationALLIANCE F…Almost Home Inc: $17,000 · Housing & ShelterANCHOR HOUSE INC: $7,000 · Housing & ShelterMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $13,750 · InternationalFRIENDS OF BROOMFIELD INC: $12,000 · Recreation & SportsPROJECT ANGEL HEART: $7,000 · Community Improvement
Other$179,600Human Services$78,150Education$33,500Housing & Shelter$24,000International$13,750Recreation & Sports$12,000Community Improvement$7,000

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 budgetALLIANCE FOR CHOICE IN EDUCATION: $33,500 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $24,500 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetTHERE WITH CARE: $17,250 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetAlmost Home Inc: $17,000 over 9y, 0.4% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $13,750 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetHOPE HOUSE OF COLORADO: $13,250 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF BROOMFIELD INC: $12,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetJoshuas Storehouse and Distribution Center: $12,000 over 6y, 2.4% of budgetASHLEY DOOLITTLE FOUNDATION: $10,400 over 8y, 87% of budgetROCKY MOUNTAIN MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS CENTER: $8,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetANCHOR HOUSE INC: $7,000 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetA LITTLE HELP: $7,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetPROJECT ANGEL HEART: $7,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetCOMMUNITY SERVICES OF BROOMFIELD: $6,750 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetTHE URBAN FARM: $5,500 over 9y, 0.2% of budgetWELD COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $5,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetA PRECIOUS CHILD INC: $5,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $4,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFAMILY TREE INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFOOD BANK OF THE ROCKIES: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGRAND COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetROCKY MOUNTAIN HONOR FLIGHT: $2,000 over 1y, 1.0% 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 ALLIANCE FOR CHOICE IN EDUCATION ↗
  • Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds THERE WITH CARE ↗
  • Who funds Almost Home Inc ↗
  • Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
  • Who funds HOPE HOUSE OF COLORADO ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF BROOMFIELD INC ↗
  • Who funds Joshuas Storehouse and Distribution Center ↗
  • Who funds ASHLEY DOOLITTLE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds ROCKY MOUNTAIN MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS CENTER ↗
  • Who funds ANCHOR HOUSE INC ↗
  • Who funds A LITTLE HELP ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT ANGEL HEART ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY SERVICES OF BROOMFIELD ↗
  • Who funds THE URBAN FARM ↗
  • Who funds WELD COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds A PRECIOUS CHILD INC ↗
  • Who funds WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds FAMILY TREE INC ↗
  • Who funds FOOD BANK OF THE ROCKIES ↗
  • Who funds GRAND COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING INC ↗
  • Who funds ROCKY MOUNTAIN HONOR FLIGHT ↗

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…Xcel Energy FoundationThe Denver FoundationThe Colorado Health F…Mile High United Way …Anschutz Family Found…Daniels FundRose Community Founda…El Pomar FoundationAmerican Online Givin…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…
Colorado Gives FoundationCO22.3× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Colorado Gives Foundation · Xcel Energy Foundation · The Denver Foundation · The Colorado Health Foundation · Mile High United Way Inc · Anschutz Family Foundation · Daniels Fund · Rose Community Foundation · El Pomar Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Stonehocker Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Stonehocker Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Wounded Warrior Project Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
5report 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 36 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 Stonehocker 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