· Private foundation
The Edmund T & Eleanor Quick Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k9 grants · $48k
- $10k–50k15 grants · $170k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| PIKES PEAK RANGE RIDERS FOUNDATION | $20,000 |
| LA JUNTA FIRE DEPARTMENT | $20,000 |
| HIGHWATER FARM | $10,000 |
| STILLWATER RANCH INC | $10,000 |
| RIMROCKER HIST SOC OF W MONTROSE CNTY | $10,000 |
| DENVER FOOD RESCUE | $10,000 |
| COLORADO FRIENDSHIP | $10,000 |
| WEST END FAMILY LINK CNTR | $10,000 |
| CHALLENGER LEARNING CENTER OF COLORADO | $10,000 |
| A PRECIOUS CHILD | $10,000 |
| TELLER PARK EARLY CHILDREN COUNCIL | $10,000 |
| WOMENS COMMUNITY LEADERSHIP INITIATIVE | $10,000 |
| THE KIVA CENTER | $10,000 |
| BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE HIGH ROCKIES | $10,000 |
| HONOR BELL FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
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 (FY17–25, $269k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 81% 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.
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 +51% since the first grant, against +41% for the ones you funded once.
53 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2025, 48 since wound down; 19 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 21% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $173k 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
- BIBIRTHRIGHT INC5× · 2020–2024 · $65k · revenue +129%
- SCSISTER CARMEN COMMUNITY CENTER INC5× · 2017–2022 · $28k · revenue +51%
- SVSOCIAL VENTURE PARTNERS BOULDER COUNTY INC6× · 2017–2022 · $25k · revenue +11%
Funded once
- SHSAVIO HOUSEone grant, 2024 · $20k · revenue 0%
- VFVIDA FOUNDATION USAone grant, 2024 · $10k · revenue 0%
- ACARCHULETA COUNTY VICTIM ASSISTANCE PROGRAM INCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $8k · revenue +69%
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.
Provide opportunities for all to thrive by offering free food resources to communities.
To provide and promote alternatives to individual car ownership, thereby reducing the environmental and social impacts associated with motor vehicle use.
Colorado CASA is a nonprofit organization that works to strengthen local CASA organizations and advocate for children in the child welfare system.
Homeward Pikes Peak empowers individuals and families to access stable housing, increase mental health, recovery, and economic stability.
Colorado Thrives exists to support Coloradans to achieve economic mobility through access to good jobs.
The Center for Nonprofit Excellence strengthens Southern Colorado's nonprofit sector through leadership and resource development, advocacy and collaboration. Together, with our partners, we are co-creating a vibrant community in the Pikes…
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…
Womens Resource Center (WRC) in Durango connects women and girls to the resources and programming that will help them reach their full potential in all states of their life.
To stabilize families living in poverty in the rural colorado counties of cheyenne, elbert, kit carson and lincoln, and to move them out of poverty through education, programs, and collaborations with other agencies.
CHF assists working families in their quest to go from homelessness to self-sufficiency for life.
Elevating Connections is dedicated to building sustained positive relationships for current & former youth in foster care-including those experiencing sibling separation-to find their voice & build meaningful community connections.
Colorado center on law and policy is an antipoverty organization advancing the rights of every coloradan.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Philanthropy Colorado and the most unlike its peers is Roundhouse Preservation Inc. 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 27 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.7% 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.
151 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. 151 of the 214 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 DONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC ↗
- Who funds BIRTHRIGHT INC ↗
- Who funds West End Family Link Center ↗
- Who funds SISTER CARMEN COMMUNITY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Prairie Family Center ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL VENTURE PARTNERS BOULDER COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds LA PUENTE HOME INC ↗
- Who funds MANNA - THE DURANGO SOUP KITCHEN ↗
- Who funds Pikes Peak Range Riders Foundation ↗
- Who funds SAVIO HOUSE ↗
- Who funds TRI-COUNTY FAMILY CARE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds DENVER FOOD RESCUE ↗
- Who funds elevateHER ↗
- Who funds WOW CHILDREN'S MUSEUM WORLD OF WONDER ↗
- Who funds BOULDER SHELTER FOR THE HOMELESS INC ↗
- Who funds SUN VALLEY YOUTH CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF FREMONT COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF CHAFFEE COUNTY ↗
- Who funds LA PLATA FAMILY CENTERS COALITION ↗
- Who funds Highwater Farm ↗
- Who funds COLORADO FRIENDSHIP INC ↗
- Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF THE SAN LUIS VALLEY INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY MINISTRY OF SW DENVER ↗
- Who funds TRI-LAKES CARES ↗
- Who funds AUDIO INFORMATION NETWORK OF COLORA ↗
- Who funds BLACK CANYON BOYS & GIRLS CLUB INC ↗
- Who funds The Pinon Project ↗
- Who funds Womens Comm Leadership Initiative ↗
- Who funds THE KIVA CENTER ↗
- Who funds WESTSIDE CARES INC ↗
- Who funds EARTHLINKS INC ↗
- Who funds BLUE SAGE CENTER FOR THE ARTS ↗
- Who funds Teller Park Early Childhood Council ↗
- Who funds HARVEST OF HOPE PANTRY ↗
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: Anschutz Family Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · El Pomar Foundation · The Colorado Health Foundation · The Denver Foundation · Av Hunter Trust Incorporated · Mile High United Way Inc · The Colorado Trust · Temple Hoyne Buell Foundation · Caring for Colorado Foundation · Daniels Fund · Trailhead Institute
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 Edmund T & Eleanor Quick 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Edmund T & Eleanor Quick Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Edmund T & Eleanor Quick Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.