Skip to content
Uchealth Greeley Hospital at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Uchealth Greeley Hospital

We improve lives.

$20M
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$19M
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, FY2019 to 2025.

Health$118MEducation$71kArts & Culture$10kHousing & Shelter$10k
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
  • $250k+2 grants · $20M
$1,040,465
Median grant
1
States reached
$216M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UCHEALTH MEDICAL GROUP$18,738,249
UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE$1,040,465
GREELEY-WELD HABITAT FOR HUMANITY$10,000
FREEDOM SERVICE DOGS$6,675
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 (FY25–25, $7k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%FREEDOM SERVICE DOGS: $7k → 8%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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$118M · 4 repeat orgs$44k to everyone else

4 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
4

Total granted

$118M
$27k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-3%
0%

Still filing today

75%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $17k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthHousing & ShelterHuman ServicesArts & CultureOther
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

  • PV
    POUDRE VALLEY MEDICAL GROUP LLC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $112M · revenue +105%
  • RO
    REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO
    7× · 2019–2025 · $5.6M
  • UN
    UCHEALTH NORTHERN COLORADO FOUNDATION
    3× · 2022–2024 · $522k · revenue -18%

Funded once

  • GP
    GREELEY PHILHARMONIC ORCHESTRA ASSOCIATION INC
    one grant, 2024 · $10k · revenue +11%
  • IM
    IVINSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2024 · $6k · revenue -74%
  • CC
    COMMUNITY COLLEGE OF AURORA
    one grant, 2024 · $6k
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
The Colorado Health Foundation
Health
2
Uchealth Greeley Hospital

We improve lives. in big ways through learning, healing and discovery. in small, personal ways through human connection. but in all ways, we improve lives.

Health
3
Western Colorado Healthcare Alliance

To help rural providers with collaborative solutions and resources focusing on rural healthcare.

Education
4
Ivinson Memorial Hospital

Trusted partners in world-class healthcare. building trust with our patients and with each other.

Health
5
Parkview Medical Center

We improve lives in big ways through learning, healing and discovery. in small, personal ways through human connection. but in all ways, we improve lives.

Health
6
Poudre Valley Health Care Inc

We improve lives. in big ways through learning, healing and discovery. in small, personal ways through human connection. but in all ways, we improve lives.

Health
7
Regional West Health Services

Health care services for the people of western nebraska and eastern wyoming.

Health
8
Center for Improving Value in Health Care

To equip partners and communities in colorado and across the nation with the resources, services and unbiased data needed to improve health and health care. we help communities, organizations and individuals identify opportunities to…

Health
9
Longs Peak Hospital Foundation

The mission of the longs peak hospital foundation exists to advance philanthropic innovation for healthy, extraordinary lives.

Health
10
Vail Health Services

Vail health services is the parent company of a group of companies generally known as vail health, whose mission is to elevate health across our mountain communities.

Health
11
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
12
Northern Arizona Healthcare Corporation

Improving health, healing people.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Uchealth Northern Colorado Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Greeley Area Habitat for Humanity. 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

9 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. 9 of the 10 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)
9/9
Grantees still filing
3/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

POUDRE VALLEY MEDICAL GROUP LLC: $111,625,017 · HealthPOUDRE VALLEY MEDICAL GROUP LLC+2 more: $55,408 · HealthREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO: $5,620,969 · OtherUCHEALTH NORTHERN COLORADO FOUNDATION: $522,245 · Other+2 more: $11,485 · OtherGREELEY AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $10,000 · Housing & ShelterGREELEY PHILHARMONIC ORCHESTRA ASSOCIATION INC: $10,000 · Arts & CultureFREEDOM SERVICE DOGS INC: $6,675 · Human Services
Health$111,680,425Other$6,154,699Housing & Shelter$10,000Arts & Culture$10,000Human Services$6,675

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPOUDRE VALLEY MEDICAL GROUP LLC: $111,625,017 over 6y, 4.4% of budgetUCHEALTH NORTHERN COLORADO FOUNDATION: $522,245 over 3y, 3.0% of budgetNORTH COLORADO HEALTH ALLIANCE: $50,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetGREELEY AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGREELEY PHILHARMONIC ORCHESTRA ASSOCIATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetFREEDOM SERVICE DOGS INC: $6,675 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetIVINSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $5,910 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCHEYENNE REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $5,408 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

Medical Center of the…Poudre Valley Health …Natl Christian Charit…Fidelity Investments …
Medical Center of the RockiesCO15.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Medical Center of the Rockies · Poudre Valley Health Care Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Uchealth Greeley Hospital funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Uchealth Greeley Hospital. 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%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    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 10 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 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 Uchealth Greeley Hospital’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