Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Billinghurst 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.

$450k
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$250k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Community Improvement$751kPhilanthropy$385kPublic Safety & Disaster$240kHousing & Shelter$165kHuman Services$90kYouth Development$39kEducation$35kReligion$32kOther$0
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $15k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $85k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $100k
  • $250k+1 grant · $250k
$15,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$9.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CREATING HEALTHIER COMMUNITIES$250,000
SUMMIT FOUNDATION$100,000
SUMMIT HIGH SCHOOL PTSO$25,000
PATRICK SCHOONOVER HEART FOUNDATION$20,000
BRECKENRIDGE OUTDOOR EDUCATION CENTER$15,000
THE KIVA CENTER$15,000
COMMUNITY METHODIST CHURCH RUIDOSO$10,000
SMART BELLIES$5,000
SUMMIT COUNTY LIBRARY FOUNDATION$5,000
TREETOP CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER$2,500
FATHER DYER METHODIST CHURCH$1,500
COLORADO TRAIL FOUNDATION$500
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 (FY23–23, $90k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%BOULDER JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $50k → 12%EMERGENCY FAMILY ASSISTANCE ASSOCIATION: $40k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

MT
MN
MA
NV
CT
RI
CO
MO
VA
NM
DC
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 19% of The Billinghurst Family Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

The Billinghurst 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.

56%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$790k · 3 repeat orgs$629k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +33% since the first grant, against +1% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
42

Total granted

$790k
$544k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+33%
+1%

Still filing today

33%
24%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 76% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $85k 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
EnvironmentRecreation & SportsHuman ServicesEducationHealthFood & NutritionOther
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

  • CH
    CREATING HEALTHIER COMMUNITIES
    3× · 2022–2025 · $751k
  • MC
    METHODIST CHURCH RUIDOSO
    2× · 2023–2024 · $20k
  • TK
    THE KIVA CENTER
    3× · 2022–2025 · $19k · revenue +33%

Funded once

  • TB
    THE BOULDER JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER
    one grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue -13%
  • EF
    EMERGENCY FAMILY ASSISTANCE ASSOCIATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $40k · revenue +29%
  • JA
    JOHN AND SHEILA MARTIN
    one grant, 2024 · $15k
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
350 Colorado

We are a grassroots movement working to build a fossil-free future powered by 100% renewable energy. we empower communities across colorado to join together to fight for environmental justice. through our volunteer-led teams, we use a…

Environment
2
Climate Foundation

To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.

Science & Tech
3
Colorado Gives Foundation

We connect people, ideas, and nonprofits to make good happen. our vision is that all of jeffco is thriving.

Philanthropy
4
Western Conservation Foundation

Building leaders to protect the west's land, air, and water.

Environment
5
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
6
Boulder Watershed Collective

The Boulder Watershed Collective is a 501c3 non-profit stakeholder-driven organization established to address forested watershed health,resiliency and stewardship. We have three program areas: ClimateAdaptation and Resilience Watershed…

Environment
7
Colorado Water Trust

To restore water to colorado's rivers.

Environment
8
Green Foothills Foundation dba Green Foothills

Our mission is to protect local nature and farmland to ensure a healthy environment for everyone.

—
9
The Sierra Fund

The Sierra Fund (TSF) is a non-profit organization with a mission to restore ecosystem and community resiliency in the Sierra Nevada.

Environment
10
Conservation Colorado

Our work secures policies and elevates leaders that advance climate action and environmental justice. we help them do it, and hold them to it. we work for a colorado where every community can breathe clean air, drink clean water, protect…

Civil Rights
11
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
12
Volunteers for Outdoor Colorado

Motivate and enable people to be active stewards of colorado's natural resources.

Recreation & Sports
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Community Foundation Boulder County; the most unlike its peers is World Wildlife Fund Inc. 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

20 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. 20 of the 57 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
11/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CREATING HEALTHIER COMMUNITIES: $751,000 · OtherCREATING HEALTHIER COMMUNITIES+41 more: $499,000 · Other+41 moreVANGUARD CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT PROGRAM: $185,000 · PhilanthropyVANGUARD CHARITABLE ENDO…THE SUMMIT FOUNDATION: $100,000 · PhilanthropyTHE SUMMIT FOUNDATIONCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION BOULDER COUNTY: $100,000 · PhilanthropyCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION BOU…THE BOULDER JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $50,000 · Human ServicesEMERGENCY FAMILY ASSISTANCE ASSOCIATION: $40,000 · Human ServicesBreckenridge Outdoor Education Center: $15,000 · Recreation & SportsNATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION: $10,000 · Recreation & Sports+1 more: $500 · Recreation & SportsTHE KIVA CENTER: $18,960 · EnvironmentWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $2,000 · Environment+3 more: $2,000 · EnvironmentPATRICK SCHOONOVER HEART FOUNDATION: $20,000 · HealthSave The Children Federation Inc: $10,000 · International
Other$1,250,000Philanthropy$385,000Human Services$90,000Recreation & Sports$25,500Environment$22,960Health$20,000International$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetVANGUARD CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT PROGRAM: $185,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SUMMIT FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION BOULDER COUNTY: $100,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE BOULDER JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $50,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetEMERGENCY FAMILY ASSISTANCE ASSOCIATION: $40,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE KIVA CENTER: $18,960 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetBreckenridge Outdoor Education Center: $15,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSave The Children Federation Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSUMMIT COUNTY LIBRARY FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetALEXANDER DAWSON FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetColorado Healing Fund: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCENTER FOR CARBON REMOVAL: $750 over 1y, 0.0% of budget350ORG: $750 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC: $500 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.

  • Who funds VANGUARD CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT PROGRAM ↗
  • Who funds THE SUMMIT FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY FOUNDATION BOULDER COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds THE BOULDER JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER ↗
  • Who funds EMERGENCY FAMILY ASSISTANCE ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds PATRICK SCHOONOVER HEART FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE KIVA CENTER ↗
  • Who funds Breckenridge Outdoor Education Center ↗

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 FoundationCO20.7× affinity8 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Colorado Gives Foundation · Amg Charitable Gift Foundation · The Summit Foundation · Community Foundation Boulder County · Xcel Energy Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 The Billinghurst Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Billinghurst Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 30%
  • Save the Children Federation Inc: 30% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get 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
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 57 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 Billinghurst Family’s filings →

More from the funding graph