· Public charity
Swedish Medical Center Auxiliary
The exempt purpose is to provide caring service to improve the health and well being of patients (and their families, visitors, and hospital employees) at swedish medical center, as well as providing services to improve the health of the community.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2019.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 15 grants below total $921,158 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $957,144 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $35,986 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2019
- Under $10k5 grants · $16k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $92k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $498k
- $250k+1 grant · $315k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| REGIS UNIVERSITY | $315,000 |
| DOCTOR'S CARE | $190,000 |
| LISTEN FOUNDATION | $155,000 |
| CRAIG FOUNDATION | $152,875 |
| HCA HOPE FUND | $30,000 |
| INTEGRATED FAMILY COMMUNITY SERVICES | $15,000 |
| WELLSPRING COMMUNITY | $15,000 |
| HOUSE OF HOPE | $12,000 |
| CLOTHES TO KIDS OF DENVER | $10,000 |
| FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH | $10,000 |
| PATIENT AND FAMILY PROGRAMS AT SWEDISH | $6,283 |
| DENVER PET PARTNERS | $5,000 |
| DENVER RESCUE MISSION | $2,000 |
| SALVATION ARMY | $2,000 |
| FOOD BANK OF THE ROCKIES | $1,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY19–19, $42k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 64% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +21% since the first grant, against -94% for the ones you funded once.
3 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2019, 0 since wound down; 12 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2019, 22% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $717k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- DCDOCTORS CARE2× · 2018–2019 · $199k · revenue +21%
- HOHOUSE OF HOPE2× · 2018–2019 · $14k
- SASALVATION ARMY2× · 2018–2019 · $3k
Funded once
- CNCOLORADO NEUROLOGICAL INSTITUTEone grant, 2018 · $6k · revenue -94%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
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.
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.
To equip partners and communities in colorado and across the nation with the resources, services and unbiased data needed to improve health and health care. we help communities, organizations and individuals identify opportunities to…
Support the work of the denver health and hospital authority in its mission to sustain and advance the health and well-being of denver, colorado and the rocky mountain region.
To provide equitable primary health care and resources to those with limited access across colorado, especially to those who are uninsured.
To provide food to all in need through community partnerships and hunger relief programs. Our vision is a hunger-free Larimer County.
To provide high-quality, affordable health care services to improve the health of our members and the communities we serve.
To provide culturally competent services that promote quality health for american indian and alaskan native families and individuals in the denver area.
We work with people with disabilities, their families and the community to create independence so that all may thrive.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Denver Rescue Mission and the most unlike its peers is Craig Hospital Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
12 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 12 of the 16 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds REGIS UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds DOCTORS CARE ↗
- Who funds LISTEN FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Craig Hospital Foundation ↗
- Who funds THE HCA HOPE FUND ↗
- Who funds WELLSPRING COMMUNITY ↗
- Who funds Integrated Family Community Services ↗
- Who funds CLOTHES TO KIDS OF DENVER INC ↗
- Who funds COLORADO NEUROLOGICAL INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Denver Pet Partners ↗
- Who funds DENVER RESCUE MISSION ↗
- Who funds FOOD BANK OF THE ROCKIES ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Colorado Gives Foundation · Schlessman Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Swedish Medical Center Auxiliary funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Swedish Medical Center Auxiliary?
Find your warmest path to Swedish Medical Center Auxiliary through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.