Skip to content
The John E and Margaret L Lane Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The John E and Margaret L Lane 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.

$2.5M
Granted FY2024still arriving
26
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$500k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Health$3.1MEducation$2.7MArts & Culture$1.9MAnimals$1.9MHuman Services$1.3MCommunity Improvement$494kYouth Development$342kRecreation & Sports$150kOther$0
02FY2024 · 26 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k6 grants · $32k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $158k
  • $50k–250k9 grants · $1.1M
  • $250k+3 grants · $1.3M
$40,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$41M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Colorado Springs Therapeutic Riding Center$500,000
Children's Hospital Colorado Foundation$500,000
Young Life$275,000
Parents Challenge$235,000
Translational Genomics Research Institute Found$200,000
Peak Education$200,000
Colorado Springs Pioneer Museum$100,000
CAREERS IN CONSTRUCTION COLORADO$100,000
Individual grant recipient$75,000
COSILoveYou$75,000
US Olympic & Paralympic Museum$50,000
Junior Achievement of Southern Colorado$50,000
University of Colorado Colorado Springs$40,000
Saint Joseph Catholic Church$25,000
Read Better Be Better$25,000
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 (FY17–24, $253k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Foresight Ski Guides Inc: $30k → 7%Foresight Ski Guides Inc: $25k → 7%COSILoveYou: $75k → 9%The Resource Exchange: $13k → 9%The Resource Exchange: $10k → 9%Cheyenne Village: $50k → 9%Cheyenne Village: $50k → 9%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.

75%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$9.5M · 26 repeat orgs$3.2M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +39% since the first grant, against +3% for those funded once.

26 repeat relationships: 15 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

26
20

Total granted

$9.5M
$2.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+39%
+3%

Still filing today

62%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $679k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EducationHuman ServicesHealthArts & CulturePhilanthropyCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • TC
    THE COLORADO COLLEGE
    6× · 2017–2022 · $1.8M · revenue +39%
  • CH
    Children's Hospital Colorado Foundation
    5× · 2019–2024 · $1.5M · revenue +42%
  • CS
    COLO SPGS THERAPEUTIC RIDING CENTER
    4× · 2019–2024 · $520k · revenue +356% · 61% of their budget

Funded once

  • YO
    YMCA of the Pikes Peak Region
    one grant, 2020 · $750k
  • UO
    US Olympic Museum
    one grant, 2017 · $500k
  • EI
    Exponential Impactgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $491k · revenue +28% · 75% of their budget
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
Center for Nonprofit Excellence

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…

—
2
Aia Colorado

AIA Colorado,is the voice of the architecture profession in Colorado. Through advocacy, leadership development, education and resources for architects, the organization supports architecture professionals in designing a better world where…

—
3
Colorado Springs Convention and Visitors Bureau

Colorado Springs Convention and Visitors Bureau's, now doing business as Visit Colorado Springs (VCOS), primary exempt purpose is promotion of the Pikes Peak Region. VCOS is designed to stimulate the visitor industry in the Pikes Peak…

—
4
Colorado Gives Foundation

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

Philanthropy
5
Colorado Physician Health Program Corporation

The mission of the Colorado Physician Health Program Corporation is to promote the health and well-being of physicians and physician assistants through evaluation, treatment referral, support education and research.

Health
6
The Colorado Parks Foundation Inc
Recreation & Sports
7
Colorado Press Association

Promote the general interest of daily, weekly, and monthly newspapers and online publications, improve editorials and business methods of daily and weekly newspapers, and advance those newspapers' usefulness and influence in the public…

—
8
Colorado Museum of Natural History

Be a catalyst! Ignite our community's passion for nature and science.

Arts & Culture
9
Colorado Legal Services

To provide meaningful access to high quality, civil legal services in the pursuit of justice for as many low income persons and members of vulnerable populations throughout colorado as possible.

Crime & Legal
10
Public Broadcasting of Colorado Inc

To deliver meaningful news, music, and cultural experiences to everyone in colorado using the power of the human voice in all its forms

Arts & Culture
11
Set of Colorado Springs

S.e.t. of colorado springs is made up of a small multi-skilled staff and a large corps of volunteers, including many in the medical professions. s.e.t. of colorado springs collaborates with other care-givers in the pikes peak area to teach…

—
12
Colorado Chamber of Commerce Fka Co Assn of Commerce & Industry

The colorado chamber of commerce mission is to enhance the business climate of the state of colorado by promoting a positive legislative and regulatory environment and providing programs and services for its members, economic education,…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Pikes Peak Community Foundation; the most unlike its peers is White Water Institute 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

38 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 38 of the 59 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
35/38
Grantees still filing
23/38
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CHEYENNE MOUNTAIN ZOO: $1,750,000 · OtherCHEYENNE MOUNTAIN ZOOColorado Springs Fine Arts Center: $1,002,900 · OtherColorado Springs Fine Arts CenterYMCA of the Pikes Peak Region: $750,000 · OtherYMCA of the Pikes Peak RegionUS Olympic Museum: $500,000 · OtherUS Olympic MuseumYMCA: $450,000 · OtherYMCATranslational Genomics Research Institute Found: $400,000 · OtherTranslational Genomics Research Institute FoundUniversity of Colorado Colorado Springs: $265,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $250,000 · OtherNational Museum of WWII Aviation: $230,000 · Other+30 more: $933,350 · Other+30 moreTHE COLORADO COLLEGE: $1,800,000 · EducationTHE COLORADO COLLEGEPeak Education: $400,000 · EducationPeak EducationPARENTS CHALLENGE: $250,000 · EducationPARENTS CHALLENGE+3 more: $115,000 · EducationChildren's Hospital Colorado Foundation: $1,497,000 · HealthChildren's Hospita…COLO SPGS THERAPEUTIC RIDING CENTER: $520,000 · HealthCOLO SPGS THERAPEU…+1 more: $50,000 · HealthPeak Vista Community Health Ctrs Foundation: $500,000 · PhilanthropyPIKES PEAK COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $89,229 · Philanthropy+1 more: $16,000 · PhilanthropyExponential Impact: $490,565 · Community ImprovementPIKES PEAK OUTDOOR RECREATION ALLIANCE: $30,000 · Community ImprovementYOUNG LIFE: $275,000 · Youth DevelopmentHillside Connection: $16,750 · Youth DevelopmentCheyenne Village: $100,000 · Human ServicesCOS I LOVE YOU: $75,000 · Human ServicesFORESIGHT SKI GUIDES INC: $55,000 · Human ServicesTHE RESOURCE EXCHANGE INC: $22,500 · Human Services
Other$6,531,250Education$2,565,000Health$2,067,000Philanthropy$605,229Community Improvement$520,565Youth Development$291,750Human Services$252,500

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE COLORADO COLLEGE: $1,800,000 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetChildren's Hospital Colorado Foundation: $1,497,000 over 5y, 0.7% of budgetColorado Springs Fine Arts Center: $1,002,900 over 6y, 29% of budgetCOLO SPGS THERAPEUTIC RIDING CENTER: $520,000 over 4y, 61% of budgetExponential Impact: $490,565 over 1y, 75% of budgetPeak Education: $400,000 over 5y, 13% of budgetYOUNG LIFE: $275,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPARENTS CHALLENGE: $250,000 over 3y, 28% of budgetCOLORADO SPRINGS PIONEERS MUSEUM: $105,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetCheyenne Village: $100,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetCareers in Construction Colorado: $100,000 over 1y, 6.4% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF THE PIKES PEAK REGION: $100,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetPIKES PEAK COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $89,229 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetCOS I LOVE YOU: $75,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetFORESIGHT SKI GUIDES INC: $55,000 over 2y, 12% of budgetUnited States Olympic and Paralympic Museum: $50,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetREAD BETTER BE BETTER: $50,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetJUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT OF SOUTHERN COLORADO INC: $50,000 over 1y, 8.2% of budgetCATHOLIC HEALTH INITIATIVES COLORADO FOUNDATION: $50,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION: $40,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPIKES PEAK OUTDOOR RECREATION ALLIANCE: $30,000 over 3y, 3.3% of budgetMANITOU SPRINGS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 1y, 6.8% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE RESOURCE EXCHANGE INC: $22,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSHIELD 616 INC: $20,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetCare and Share Inc: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHillside Connection: $16,750 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetBump in the Road Project: $16,000 over 1y, 5.2% of budgetWESTERN GOLF ASSOCIATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEmpty Stocking Fund Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetRichards Rubbish Roundup: $8,500 over 1y, 11% of budgetCASA of the Pikes Peak Region: $7,500 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetCHEYENNE MOUNTAIN PUBLIC BROADCAST HOUSE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetHAPPY CATS HAVEN INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.7% 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.

El Pomar FoundationThe Joseph Henry Edmo…Pikes Peak Community …The Myron Stratton Ho…Dusty and Katherine L…Pikes Peak United WayINDYGIVE DBA Give Pik…The Hester E & Edwin …Ent Credit UnionT Rowe Price Foundati…G E Johnson FoundationChristian Community F…
El Pomar FoundationCO38.4× affinity17 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: El Pomar Foundation · The Joseph Henry Edmondson Foundation · Pikes Peak Community Foundation · The Myron Stratton Home · Dusty and Katherine Loo Foundation Dba Bloom Foundation · Pikes Peak United Way · INDYGIVE DBA Give Pikes Peak · The Hester E & Edwin W Giddings Foundation · Ent Credit Union · T Rowe Price Foundation · G E Johnson Foundation · Christian Community Foundation Inc

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 John E and Margaret L Lane Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The John E and Margaret L Lane Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    10report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The John E and Margaret L Lane Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The John E and Margaret L Lane 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.

    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 59 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on John E and Margaret L Lane’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