Skip to content
The Wickham Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

The Wickham Foundation Inc

Its FY2018 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$38k
Granted FY2018
8
Grants FY2018
2
States reached
$11k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2018.

Arts & Culture$22kRecreation & Sports$21kAnimals$15kYouth Development$15kEducation$14kCommunity Improvement$5kHealth$1kInternational$500
02FY2018 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2018

  • Under $10k6 grants · $17k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $21k
$5,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$16k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ROUNDUP RIVER RANCH$11,000
YOUTH POWER 365$10,000
VILAR PERFORMING ARTS CENTER$5,000
CANINE COMPANION FOR INDEPENDENCE$5,000
CELEBRATE THE BEAT$5,000
BRAVO VAIL MUSIC FESTIVAL$1,200
MASS DOWN SYNDROME CONGRESS$250
DENVER ART MUSEUM$150
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–18) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 0% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%MASS DOWN SYNDROME CONGRESS: $1k → 8%CELEBRATE THE BEAT: $5k → 6%WALKING MOUNTAINS SCIENCE SCHOOL: $14k → 7%CANINE COMPANION FOR INDEPENDENCE: $10k → 9%DENVER ART MUSEUM: $200 → 12%MASS DOWN SYNDROME CONGRESS: $250 → 8%CELEBRATE THE BEAT: $5k → 6%ROUNDUP RIVER RANCH: $11k → 7%CANINE COMPANION FOR INDEPENDENCE: $5k → 9%YOUTH POWER 365: $10k → 7%ROUNDUP RIVER RANCH: $10k → 7%YOUTH POWER 365: $5k → 7%VILAR PERFORMING ARTS CENTER: $5k → 7%VILAR PERFORMING ARTS CENTER: $4k → 7%BRAVO VAIL MUSIC FESTIVAL: $1k → 7%BRAVO VAIL MUSIC FESTIVAL: $1k → 7%GLOBAL PARTNERS FOR HEALTH: $500 → 7%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.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$74k · 8 repeat orgs$15k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +73% since the first grant, against -9% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2018, 0 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
2

Total granted

$74k
$15k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+73%
-9%

Still filing today

75%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2018, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18
Arts & CultureRecreation & SportsPhilanthropyInternationalOther
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

  • RR
    ROUNDUP RIVER RANCH
    2× · 2017–2018 · $21k · revenue +73%
  • Y
    YOUTHPOWER365
    2× · 2017–2018 · $15k · revenue +65%
  • VP
    VILAR PERFORMING ARTS CENTER INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $9k · revenue ×200

Funded once

  • WM
    WALKING MOUNTAINS SCIENCE SCHOOL
    one grant, 2017 · $14k
  • GP
    GLOBAL PARTNERS FOR HEALTH
    one grant, 2017 · $500 · 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
Vail International Pro Am
Recreation & Sports
2
Colorado Jazz Ambassadors
Arts & Culture
3
Vanguard Concerts
—
4
Vail-Summit Research & Education Foundat
Education
5
Rocky Mountain Ballet Theatre
Arts & Culture
6
Accessible Alpine Adventure Tours
Health
7
Wind River Valley Artist Guild
—
8
Asian Performing Arts of Colorado Inc
Arts & Culture
9
Boulder County Injured and Fallen Officer Foundation
Public Safety & Disaster
10
Rio Grande Trails and Tales
Education
11
The Colorado Parks Foundation Inc
Recreation & Sports
12
Bravo Colorado Music Festival Endowment Foundation

To support the bravo! colorado at beaver creek/vail dba vail valley music festival, a 501(c)3 organization dedicated to presenting and sponsoring musical events in the vail valley

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Vail Valley Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Global Partners for Health. 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CANINE COMPANION FOR INDEPENDENCE: $15,000 · OtherCANINE COMPANION FOR INDEPENDENCEWALKING MOUNTAINS SCIENCE SCHOOL: $14,000 · OtherWALKING MOUNTAINS SCIENCE SCHOOLMASS DOWN SYNDROME CONGRESS: $1,250 · OtherCELEBRATE THE BEAT: $10,000 · Arts & CultureCELEBRATE THE BEATVILAR PERFORMING ARTS CENTER INC: $9,400 · Arts & CultureVILAR PERFORMING ARTS CENT…BRAVO COLORADO AT BEAVER CREEK-VAIL INC DBA BRAVO VAIL VALLEY MUSIC FESTIVAL: $2,200 · Arts & CultureBRAVO COLORADO AT BEAVER C…+1 more: $350 · Arts & CultureROUNDUP RIVER RANCH: $21,000 · Recreation & SportsROUNDUP RIVER RANCHYOUTHPOWER365: $15,000 · PhilanthropyYOUTHPOWER365VAIL VALLEY FOUNDATION: $5,000 · Community ImprovementGLOBAL PARTNERS FOR HEALTH: $500 · International
Other$30,250Arts & Culture$21,950Recreation & Sports$21,000Philanthropy$15,000Community Improvement$5,000International$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$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetROUNDUP RIVER RANCH: $21,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetYOUTHPOWER365: $15,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetCELEBRATE THE BEAT: $10,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetVILAR PERFORMING ARTS CENTER INC: $9,400 over 2y, 12% of budgetBRAVO COLORADO AT BEAVER CREEK-VAIL INC DBA BRAVO VAIL VALLEY MUSIC FESTIVAL: $2,200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGLOBAL PARTNERS FOR HEALTH: $500 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetDENVER ART MUSEUM: $350 over 2y, 0.0% 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.

National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
National Philanthropic TrustPA9.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Wickham Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Wickham Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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.

    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 2018, released 2018. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Wickham’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