Skip to content

· Private foundation

The McDaniel Family 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.

$120k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2023 to 2025.

Human Services$230kReligion$30kYouth Development$25kHealth$20kCrime & Legal$15k
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$20,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$5k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DREAM CENTERS OF COLORADO SPRINGS$20,000
RAISE THE FUTURE$20,000
COMMUNITY UPLIFT PARTNERSHIP$20,000
SACRED HEART HOUSE OF DENVER$20,000
HOPE HOUSE$20,000
SPARKHOPE AUTOMOTIVE$20,000
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 (FY23–25, $165k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 48% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 8%HOPE HOUSE: $20k → 7%COMMUNITY UPLIFT PARTNERSHIP: $20k → 10%HOPE HOUSE: $20k → 7%HANDS OF THE CARPENTER: $25k → 7%HANDS OF THE CARPENTER: $20k → 7%RAISE THE FUTURE: $20k → 12%RAISE THE FUTURE: $20k → 12%RAISE THE FUTURE: $20k → 12%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.

56%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$180k · 4 repeat orgs$140k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +20% since the first grant, against +9% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
4

Total granted

$180k
$80k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+20%
+9%

Still filing today

100%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 50% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $60k went to new ones.

50%100%’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’23’24’25
Human ServicesCrime & LegalCivil RightsHealthOther
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

  • SA
    SparkHope Automotive
    3× · 2023–2025 · $65k · revenue +46%
  • RT
    RAISE THE FUTURE
    3× · 2023–2025 · $60k · revenue +20%
  • HH
    HOPE HOUSE OF COLORADO
    2× · 2024–2025 · $40k · revenue +1%

Funded once

  • HA
    HEART AND HAND CENTER
    one grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue -27%
  • SH
    SACRED HEART HOUSE
    one grant, 2024 · $25k
  • LF
    LOVE FOR LILY
    one grant, 2023 · $20k · revenue +9%
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
Colorado Wellness Center for Girls
—
2
Urban Peak Denver

Urban peak helps youth experiencing homelessness and youth at risk of becoming homeless overcome real life challenges by providing essential services and a supportive community, empowering them to become self-sufficient adults.

Housing & Shelter
3
Safehouse Denver Inc

Safehouse denver assists adult, children, and youth in reclaiming their right to a life free from domestic violence. the agency provides a broad spectrum of culturally competent, trauma-informed services, including but not limited to,…

Human Services
4
Hope's Promise Inc

To strengthen families through ethical, christ-centered foster care, adoption, and global orphan care.

Human Services
5
Hope and Home

Hope & home creates ways for amazing people to change the lives of children in foster care. as a nondenominational christian charity, hope & home trains, certifies, and actively supports foster families across the state of colorado.…

Human Services
6
Colorado Dream Foundation

We partner with youth and their families as they successfully navigate school, college, and career by providing a holistic academic, social, and emotional program from elementary school through college, along with post-secondary…

—
7
Family Housing Network of Fort Collins Inc

Faith Family Hospitality's mission is to support families experiencing homelessness to achieve sustainable self-sufficiency in a timely and dignified manner. This interfaith volunteer effort coordinates the work of 30 diverse Fort Collins…

Human Services
8
Julia Greeley Home Inc

Julia greeley home, inc. serves single unaccompanied women in the denver metro area between the ages of 18 and 64 who are struggling with chronic or repeated homelessness. the program fulfills existing gaps between overnight short term…

Housing & Shelter
9
Hope Center Inc

The organization provides childcare, preschool programs, gifted programs, vocational training, and therapy for the developmentally disabled.

Human Services
10
Christian Family Care Agency Inc

The mission of christian family care is to strengthen families and serve at-risk children in the name of jesus christ. the outcome of our work results in building flourishing families and communities focusing on three pillars: preserve,…

Human Services
11
House of Hope

We assist young mothers with housing and wrap around services.

Human Services
12
House of Hope

Treating substance use disorders, rebuilding lives, strengthening families, and empowering women.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Hope House of Colorado; the most unlike its peers is Community Uplift Partnership. 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

8 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. 8 of the 11 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SparkHope Automotive: $65,000 · Human ServicesSparkHope AutomotiveRAISE THE FUTURE: $60,000 · Human ServicesRAISE THE FUTUREHOPE HOUSE OF COLORADO: $40,000 · Human ServicesHOPE HOUSE OF COLORADOCommunity Uplift Partnership: $20,000 · Human ServicesCommunity Uplift PartnershipLOVE FOR LILY: $20,000 · Human ServicesLOVE FOR LILYSACRED HEART HOUSE: $25,000 · OtherSACRED HEART HOUSESACRED HEART HOUSE OF DENVER: $20,000 · OtherSACRED HEART HOUSE …FOR THE LOVE OF GRACE: $10,000 · OtherFOR THE LOVE OF GRA…HEART AND HAND CENTER: $25,000 · Crime & LegalDREAM CENTERS OF COLORADO SPRINGS: $20,000 · HealthCHILD ADVOCATES - DENVER CASA: $15,000 · Civil Rights
Human Services$205,000Other$55,000Crime & Legal$25,000Health$20,000Civil Rights$15,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSparkHope Automotive: $65,000 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetRAISE THE FUTURE: $60,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetHOPE HOUSE OF COLORADO: $40,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetHEART AND HAND CENTER: $25,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetCommunity Uplift Partnership: $20,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetLOVE FOR LILY: $20,000 over 1y, 5.7% of budgetCHILD ADVOCATES - DENVER CASA: $15,000 over 2y, 0.8% 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.

Colorado Gives FoundationCO16.9× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Colorado Gives Foundation · Nathan B & Florence R Burt Foundation · The Anschutz Foundation · The Denver Foundation · The Janus Henderson Foundation · Anschutz Family Foundation · El Pomar Foundation · Mile High United Way Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 McDaniel Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The McDaniel Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 McDaniel Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The McDaniel Family 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 11 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on McDaniel Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph