Skip to content
The Donor Alliance Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

The Donor Alliance Foundation

The Foundation was created in December 1993 as a nonprofit 501(c)(3) and re-established in August 2017, to operate exclusively for charitable, scientific and educational purposes.

$225k
Granted FY2024still arriving
11
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$100k
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, FY2018 to 2024.

Health$807kEducation$409kHuman Services$85kHousing & Shelter$20k
02FY2024 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 11 grants below total $205,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $225,000 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $20,000 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k3 grants · $23k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $82k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $100k
$10,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$2.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Regents of the University of Colorado$100,000
National Kidney Foundation$15,000
Brent Eley Foundation$15,000
Grief Center of Southwest Colorado$12,000
The Limb Preservation Foundation$10,000
Taylors Gift Foundation$10,000
University of Colorado Health$10,000
There With Care$10,000
American Transplant Foundation$8,000
Judis House$7,500
Rocky Mountain Childrens Health Foundation$7,500
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 (FY18–24, $73k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 14% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%There With Care: $10k → 12%Rocky Mountain Children's Health Foundation: $15k → 7%Rocky Mountain Children's Health Foundation: $10k → 7%Rocky Mountain Childrens Health Foundation: $10k → 7%Rocky Mountain Childrens Health Foundation: $8k → 7%ROCKY MOUNTAIN CHILDREN'S HEALTH FOUNDATION: $8k → 7%Rocky Mountain Childrens Health Foundation: $7k → 7%ROCKY MOUNTAIN CHILDRENS HEALTH FOUNDATION: $6k → 7%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.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.1M · 13 repeat orgs$181k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +28% since the first grant, against +8% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
8

Total granted

$1.1M
$124k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+28%
+8%

Still filing today

77%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 72% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $57k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthHuman ServicesEducationPhilanthropyHousing & 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

  • CH
    Children's Hospital Colorado Foundation
    5× · 2019–2023 · $172k · revenue +42%
  • BE
    BRENT ELEY FOUNDATION
    5× · 2020–2024 · $90k · revenue +28%
  • NK
    National Kidney Foundation Inc
    5× · 2018–2023 · $80k · revenue +18%

Funded once

  • CH
    Children's Hospital Coloradograduated
    one grant, 2018 · $45k · revenue +64%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF DENVER
    one grant, 2023 · $20k · revenue +8%
  • WM
    WYOMING MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2019 · $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
The Colorado Health Foundation
Health
2
Phoenix Children's Hospital Foundation

Phoenix children's hospital foundation supports phoenix children's hospital through fundraising ensuring that the hospital continues to stay on the leading edge of pediatric medicine and is equipped to fulfill its mission to advance hope,…

Health
3
Children's Health Care

We champion the health needs of children and families. we are committed to improving children's health by providing the highest-quality, family centered care, advanced through research and education.

Health
4
Children's Hospital & Research Center At Oakland

The mission of children's hospital & research center at oakland is to protect and advance the health and well-being of children through clinical care, teaching and research.

Health
5
Lehigh Valley Hospital

Our mission is to heal, comfort and care for the people of our community by providing advanced and compassionate health care of superior quality and value, supported by education and research.

Health
6
Children's Hospital Corporation

Provider of pediatric healthcare, education, research & community service

Health
7
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc

The mission of dfci is to provide expert, compassionate, and equitable care to children, adults, and their families, while advancing the understanding, diagnosis, treatment, cure, and prevention of cancer and related diseases. we train new…

Health
8
Colorado Health Institute
Health
9
Cystic Fibrosis Foundation

To cure cf and provide all people with cf the opportunity to lead long, fulfilling lives by funding research and drug development, partnering with the cf community, and advancing high-quality, specialized care.

Health
10
Johns Hopkins All Children's Hospital Inc

Mission: johns hopkins all children's hospital (all children's), a member of johns hopkins medicine, strives to provide the highest quality care to improve the health of our entire community through innovation, collaboration, service…

Health
11
The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia

The children's hospital of philadelphia, the oldest hospital in the united states dedicated exclusively to pediatrics, strives to be the world leader in the advancement of health care for children by integrating excellent patient care,…

Health
12
Sutter Bay Hospitals

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Children's Hospital Colorado Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Heartlight Center Inc. 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

19 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. 19 of the 26 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/19
Grantees still filing
11/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Children's Hospital Colorado Foundation: $171,500 · HealthChildren's Hospital Colorado FoundationBRENT ELEY FOUNDATION: $90,000 · HealthBRENT ELEY FOUNDATIONTransplant Foundation Inc: $84,500 · HealthTransplant Foundation IncNational Kidney Foundation Inc: $80,000 · HealthNational Kidney Foundation IncLIMB PRESERVATION FOUNDATION: $52,650 · HealthLIMB PRESERVATION FOUNDATIONChildren's Hospital Colorado: $45,000 · HealthChildren's Hospital ColoradoPortercare Adventist Health System: $26,250 · Health+4 more: $41,000 · Health+4 moreREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO: $404,000 · OtherREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADOUNIVERSITY OF COLORADO HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $65,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF COLORADO HOSPITAL FOUNDATION+7 more: $85,000 · Other+7 moreROCKY MOUNTAIN CHILDREN'S HEALTH FOUNDATION: $63,000 · Human ServicesTHERE WITH CARE: $10,000 · Human ServicesHEARTLIGHT CENTER INC: $52,500 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF DENVER: $20,000 · EducationTRANSPLANT LIVING CENTERS INC: $20,000 · Housing & ShelterJUDI'S HOUSE INC: $10,000 · Philanthropy
Health$590,900Other$554,000Human Services$73,000Education$72,500Housing & Shelter$20,000Philanthropy$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 budgetChildren's Hospital Colorado Foundation: $171,500 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetBRENT ELEY FOUNDATION: $90,000 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetTransplant Foundation Inc: $84,500 over 7y, 4.3% of budgetNational Kidney Foundation Inc: $80,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetROCKY MOUNTAIN CHILDREN'S HEALTH FOUNDATION: $63,000 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetLIMB PRESERVATION FOUNDATION: $52,650 over 4y, 3.2% of budgetHEARTLIGHT CENTER INC: $52,500 over 5y, 5.3% of budgetChildren's Hospital Colorado: $45,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPortercare Adventist Health System: $26,250 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTRANSPLANT LIVING CENTERS INC: $20,000 over 2y, 12% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF DENVER: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Liver Foundation: $12,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetGrief Center of Southwest Colorado: $12,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetSt John's Health Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHERE WITH CARE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetJUDI'S HOUSE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetHep C Connection dba Liver Health Connection: $10,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetPHOENIX SOCIETY INC: $7,500 over 1y, 0.4% 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.

The Denver FoundationColorado Gives Founda…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
The Denver FoundationCO12.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Denver Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Donor Alliance Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Donor Alliance Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 26 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Donor Alliance’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