Skip to content
Tgb Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Tgb 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.

$27k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$14k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2025.

Food & Nutrition$34kCommunity Improvement$22kArts & Culture$13kHuman Services$12kHealth$8kEducation$7kReligion$6kHousing & Shelter$5kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $14k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $14k
$5,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$468k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SUN VALLEY KITCHEN & COMMUNITY CTR$13,500
JUDI'S HOUSE$5,000
BROWN INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY PTA$5,000
THE WOMEN'S LIST$2,500
LEGAL AID FOUNDATION OF COLORADO$1,000
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 (FY22–23, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 23% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%A PRECIOUS CHILD: $1k → 5%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $300 → 12%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.

55%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$68k · 6 repeat orgs$56k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +23% since the first grant, against +21% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
11

Total granted

$68k
$51k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+23%
+21%

Still filing today

33%
91%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 81% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24’25
Recreation & SportsHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementPhilanthropyCivil RightsHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • SV
    SUN VALLEY KITCHEN & COMMUNITY CTR
    2× · 2024–2025 · $34k
  • WL
    WOMENS LIST
    2× · 2024–2025 · $13k
  • JH
    JUDI'S HOUSE INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $11k · revenue +23%

Funded once

  • PA
    PROJECT ANGEL HEART
    one grant, 2021 · $22k · revenue +21%
  • TB
    THE BLUE BENCHgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $8k · revenue +30%
  • YF
    Yellowhammer Fund
    one grant, 2023 · $5k · revenue -8%
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 Jobs With Justice Inc

Advance workers rights & social justice through building sustained relationships and taking direct action to create concrete change in the lives of working families

Employment
2
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
3
Aia Colorado

AIA Colorado,is the voice of the architecture profession in Colorado. Through advocacy, leadership development, education and resources for architects, the organization supports architecture professionals in designing a better world where…

—
4
Rocky Mountain Wild

Rocky mountain wild works to protect, connect, and restore wildlife and wild lands in the southern rocky mountain region. we work to secure the biodiversity of the mountains, plains, and desert ecosystems of colorado, wyoming, utah, and…

Environment
5
Colorado Center On Law and Policy

Colorado center on law and policy is an antipoverty organization advancing the rights of every coloradan.

Crime & Legal
6
Colorado Healing Fund

Establish a secure way for the public to contribute to victims of mass tragedy and to assist local communities with the financial, emotional, and physical needs of victims of mass tragedies in Colorado

Public Safety & Disaster
7
Urban Land Conservancy

Urban land conservancy's mission is to acquire, develop, and/or preserve community assets in urban areas for a variety of community needs especially in high poverty, low-income, underserved, at-risk communities.

Community Improvement
8
Colorado Organization for Latina Opportunity and Reproductive Rights

Colorado organization for latina opportunity and reproductive rights (color) is a community-rooted nonprofit organization that works to enable latinx individuals and their families lead safe, healthy, self-determined lives.

Health
9
Ethics Watch Dba Colorado Ethics Watch

Ethics watch uses high impact legal actions to hold public officials and organizations accountable for unethical activities that undermine the integrity of government in colorado. the organization accomplishes its mission by combining…

—
10
Aspen Valley Land Trust

Protecting the open land and special places of the roaring fork and middle colorado river valleys for wildlife, agriculture, and community forever.

Environment
11
Colorado Food Cluster Inc

Provide opportunities for all to thrive by offering free food resources to communities.

Food & Nutrition
12
Colorado Nonprofit Association

Colorado nonprofit association strengthens colorado's nonprofits through education, connection and advocacy.

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is A Precious Child Inc; the most unlike its peers is Yellowhammer Fund. 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 18 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
10/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SUN VALLEY KITCHEN & COMMUNITY CTR: $33,500 · OtherSUN VALLEY KITCHEN & COMMUNITY CTRWOMENS LIST: $12,500 · OtherWOMENS LISTST MICHAELS AND ALL ANGELS: $6,250 · OtherST MICHAELS AND ALL ANGELSBROWN INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY PTA: $5,000 · OtherBROWN INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY PTAWHITE ROCK LAKE CONSERVANCY INC: $3,250 · OtherLegal Aid Foundation of Colorado: $3,250 · Other+6 more: $5,650 · Other+6 morePROJECT ANGEL HEART: $21,500 · Community ImprovementPROJECT ANGEL HEARTJUDI'S HOUSE INC: $11,000 · PhilanthropyJUDI'S HOU…THE BLUE BENCH: $7,500 · HealthYellowhammer Fund: $5,000 · Civil RightsARCHWAY COMMUNITIES INC: $5,000 · Housing & ShelterFRIENDS OF COLORADO AVALANCHE INFORMATION CENTER: $5,000 · Public Safety & Disaster
Other$69,400Community Improvement$21,500Philanthropy$11,000Health$7,500Civil Rights$5,000Housing & Shelter$5,000Public Safety & Disaster$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPROJECT ANGEL HEART: $21,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetJUDI'S HOUSE INC: $11,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTHE BLUE BENCH: $7,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetYellowhammer Fund: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetARCHWAY COMMUNITIES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetFRIENDS OF COLORADO AVALANCHE INFORMATION CENTER: $5,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetLegal Aid Foundation of Colorado: $3,250 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetWHITE ROCK LAKE CONSERVANCY INC: $3,250 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetA PRECIOUS CHILD INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVOLUNTEERS FOR OUTDOOR COLORADO: $750 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF COLORADO INC: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHIGHVIEW: $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.

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 FoundationXcel Energy FoundationThe Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Colorado Gives FoundationCO15× affinity5 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Colorado Gives Foundation · The Denver Foundation · Xcel Energy Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Tgb Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Tgb Foundation Inc. 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%5%10%15%20%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 · 0–20%
    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 18 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 Tgb’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