How much does The DuBose Foundation give?

The DuBose Foundation reported 36 grants totaling $28,585 in its FY2025 IRS filing. It funded between 16 and 45 organizations a year over FY2020 to FY2024.

What does The DuBose Foundation fund?

By grant dollars over FY2020 to FY2025, its largest causes are Education (42%), Environment (25%), Health (10%).

Who are The DuBose Foundation's largest grantees?

By total granted over FY2020 to FY2025: Florida Institute of Technology Inc ($18k), Colorado Water Trust ($7k), The Evangelical Free Church of America ($5k).

Does The DuBose Foundation fund new organizations?

In FY2024, 27% of the organizations it funded were first-time grantees.

Does The DuBose Foundation accept unsolicited applications?

Its most recent filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and does not take unsolicited requests. Check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

Which funders back the same organizations as The DuBose Foundation?

Its strongest co-funders, measured against what their size predicts, include Patagoniaorg, Community Foundation of the Gunnison Valley, The Thomas Phillips and Jane Moore Johnson Foundation.

Where is The DuBose Foundation based?

The DuBose Foundation is based in AZ.

The DuBose Foundation

The DuBose Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The DuBose 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.

$29k

Granted FY2025still arriving

Grants FY2025still arriving

States reached

$5k

Largest

01What it funds

0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Education$23kEnvironment$14kHealth$5kReligion$4kCrime & Legal$2kHuman Services$1kYouth Development$1kAnimals$1kOther$0

02FY2025 · 36 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$300

Median grant

States reached

$263k

Total assets

Largest grants
Recipient	Amount
Florida Institute of Technology	$5,000
Colorado School of Mines	$5,000
Sheep Mountain Alliance	$3,100
San Miguel Mentoring Program DBA One to One Mentoring	$2,975
Fearsome	$2,198
Kenya Dryland Education Fund	$1,600
Evangelical Free Church of America	$1,350
Environmental Learning for Kids	$1,000
Wildlife Center of Virginia	$1,000
Anchored Hope Outreach	$600
Mountainfilm	$567
Colorado Water Trust	$400
Leukemia & Lymphoma Society	$325
Prostate Cancer Foundation	$325
Salvation Army	$320

02The need

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 (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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

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

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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.

$74k · 44 repeat orgs$11k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +25% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

44 repeat relationships: 24 still active in FY2025, 20 since wound down; 12 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$74k

$3k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+25%

Still filing today

66%

50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

HealthEnvironmentAnimalsArts & CultureYouth DevelopmentRecreation & SportsOther

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

FI
FLORIDA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY INC
4× · 2022–2025 · $18k · revenue +12%
CW
COLORADO WATER TRUST
4× · 2021–2025 · $7k · revenue +472%
NP
NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION
5× · 2020–2024 · $3k · revenue +95%

Funded once

IS
INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL YANGON
one grant, 2024 · $2k · revenue -47%
TH
Telluride Historical Museum Inc
one grant, 2024 · $200 · revenue 0%
NATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY
one grant, 2024 · $103 · revenue -6%

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.

Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International

World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment

National Forest Foundation

The national forest foundation (nff), chartered by congress, turns america's love of nature into meaningful action for 193-million acre national forest system through on the ground program work and grant making activities, and accepts and…

Recreation & Sports

Glacier National Park Conservancy

The glacier national park conservancy works to preserve and protect glacier national park for future generations.

Recreation & Sports

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

Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment

Wildlife Conservation Network Inc

Connect conservationists and supporters, deploy resources to the field, provide conservationists with tools and support they need to succeed.

Animals

The Jmt Wilderness Conservancy

Working to restore the watersheds, wilderness, and wildlife in the high sierra nevada following the john muir trail (est. 1915) for all life in california.

Environment

Nature and Culture International

Nature and culture international conserves biologically diverse landscapes in latin america, in concert with local cultures, for the well-being of the planet.

Environment

Discover Life in America Inc

Dlia will develop a model for research in biodiversity and will use the knowledge to develop and disseminate information to encourage the discovery, understanding, preservation, and enjoyment of natural resources.

Environment

Greater Yellowstone Coalition

Greater yellowstone coalition works with all people to protect the lands, waters, and wildlife of the greater yellowstone ecosystem, now and for future generations.

Environment

International Snow Leopard Trust

The international snow leopard trust aims to ethically conserve snow leopards and their high mountain ecosystems through partnerships with indigenous peoples and local communities, and through research to improve the understanding of snow…

Animals

How this is measured

The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Park Foundation; 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.

04the grantee network

51 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. 51 of the 73 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.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

48/51

Grantees still filing

29/51

Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Other$43,599Education$17,500Environment$11,503Health$5,155Animals$2,665Youth Development$2,275International$1,600

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

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.

PatagoniaorgCA20.3× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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 DuBose Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The DuBose Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24’25

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

3get no government money at all

9report 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.

Play a game based on DuBose’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