Skip to content
Wittow Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Wittow Foundation Inc

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.

$13k
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its 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 2024.

Arts & Culture$17kHealth$15kHuman Services$5k
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$5,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$180k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LONE TREE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA$5,000
PARKER SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA$5,000
COLORADO SYMPHONY ASSOCIATION$2,500
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 (FY17–17, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%DENVER HOSPICE THE: $5k → 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 field
04the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 9 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)
7/7
Grantees still filing
4/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PARKER SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA: $5,000 · Arts & CulturePARKER SYMPHONY ORCHESTRALONE TREE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA: $5,000 · Arts & CultureLONE TREE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRACOLORADO SYMPHONY ASSOCIATION: $2,500 · Arts & CultureCOLORADO SYMPHONY ASSOCIATIONCOLORADO BALLET: $2,000 · Arts & CultureCOLORADO BALLETOPERA COLORADO: $2,000 · Arts & CultureOPERA COLORADOSALAVATION ARMY: $5,000 · OtherSALAVATION ARMYST JUDE RESEARCH HOSPITAL: $5,000 · OtherST JUDE RESEARCH HOSPITALSHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN: $5,000 · HealthSHRINERS HOSPIT…HOSPICE OF METRO DENVER INC: $5,000 · Human ServicesHOSPICE OF METR…
Arts & Culture$16,500Other$10,000Health$5,000Human Services$5,000

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 budgetSHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPARKER SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA: $5,000 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetHOSPICE OF METRO DENVER INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLONE TREE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA: $5,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetCOLORADO SYMPHONY ASSOCIATION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOLORADO BALLET: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOPERA COLORADO: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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 Founda…Xcel Energy FoundationThe Anna and John J S…Rose Community Founda…The Denver FoundationNational Philanthropi…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Colorado Gives FoundationCO15.2× affinity5 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Colorado Gives Foundation · Xcel Energy Foundation · The Anna and John J Sie Foundation · Rose Community Foundation · The Denver Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Wittow Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Wittow Foundation Inc. 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 →median 0%
  • Shriners Hospitals for Children: 0% of 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 · 0–5%
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.

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 9 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 Wittow’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