· Private foundation
The DuBose Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Colorado Water Trust | $6,078 |
| Colorado School of Mines | $5,000 |
| Florida Institute of Technology | $5,000 |
| International School Yangon | $2,000 |
| Evangelical Free Church of America | $1,800 |
| National Park Foundation | $1,250 |
| Michael J Fox Foundation | $1,100 |
| Anchored Hope Outreach | $1,000 |
| Living Grace Canine Ranch | $750 |
| Bosom Buddies Lily Family Gallery at Davidson College | $309 |
| Salvation Army | $300 |
| Leukemia & Lymphoma Society | $300 |
| Off The Street Club | $250 |
| One to One Mentoring | $250 |
| Make-A-Wish | $225 |
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 (FY20–24, $325) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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 +58% since the first grant, against +36% for the ones you funded once.
38 repeat relationships — 33 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 12 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k 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
- FIFLORIDA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY INC3× · 2022–2024 · $13k · revenue +12%
- CWCOLORADO WATER TRUST3× · 2021–2024 · $6k · revenue +472%
- NPNATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION5× · 2020–2024 · $3k · revenue +208%
Funded once
- MMOUNTAINFILMone grant, 2023 · $150 · revenue +9%
- SBSovereign Bodies Instituteone grant, 2021 · $100
- NPNATIONAL PARKS ARTS FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $100 · revenue +65%
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.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.
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…
Nature and culture international conserves biologically diverse landscapes in latin america, in concert with local cultures, for the well-being of the planet.
Greater yellowstone coalition works with all people to protect the lands, waters, and wildlife of the greater yellowstone ecosystem, now and for future generations.
The glacier national park conservancy works to preserve and protect glacier national park for future generations.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
Western rivers conservancy's mission is to protect outstanding river ecosystems in the western united states. continued on schedule o.we acquire land to conserve critical habitat, provide public access for compatible use and enjoyment, and…
To sustain, restore, and enhance the nation's fish, wildlife, plants, and habitats.
The montana wildlife federation is a statewide conservation organization dedicated to protecting wildlife, wildlife habitat, and public access for outdoor recreation.
Our mission is to break down barriers to als research to find effective treatments. by uniting academia, the pharma and biotech industry, government, venture capital, related nonprofits, and the als community, we aim to overcome the…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Park Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Katmai Conservancy. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 31 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 5% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
41 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. 41 of the 61 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 FLORIDA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY INC ↗
- Who funds COLORADO WATER TRUST ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL YANGON ↗
- Who funds LIVING GRACE CANINE RANCH ↗
- Who funds OFF THE STREET CLUB ↗
- Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
- Who funds SHEEP MOUNTAIN ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds SAN MIGUEL MENTORING PROGRAM ↗
- Who funds PROSTATE CANCER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BIG CITY MOUNTAINEERS ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN RIVERS INC ↗
- Who funds BEN'S BELLS INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL BREAST CANCER FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SOUL RIVER INC ↗
- Who funds OUTDOOR AFRO ↗
- Who funds BRIGHTFOCUS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL INDIGENOUS WOMENS RESOURCE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Ronald McDonald House Global ↗
- Who funds ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC ↗
- Who funds Telluride Historical Museum Inc ↗
- Who funds MOUNTAINFILM ↗
- Who funds AMYOTROPHIC LATERAL SCLEROSIS ASSN ↗
- Who funds Rios to Rivers ↗
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: Patagoniaorg · Community Foundation of the Gunnison Valley · The Thomas Phillips and Jane Moore Johnson Foundation · National Park Foundation · Resources Legacy Fund · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · Seattle Foundation · Boston Foundation Inc · The Oregon Community Foundation · Texas Instruments Foundation · American Endowment 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 The DuBose Foundation 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.
- Als Therapy Development Foundation Inc — 8% of income from government
- Florida Institute of Technology Inc — 5% of income from government
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.