· Private foundation
Adah K Millard Charitable Trust
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2021–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k8 grants · $48k
- $10k–50k20 grants · $253k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| OMAHA PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| NEBRASKA DIAPER BANK | $20,000 |
| NEBRASKA HUMANE SOCIETY | $15,000 |
| IGNITE NEBRASKA | $15,000 |
| OMAHA PERFORMING ARTS SOCIETY | $15,000 |
| NEBRASKA CENTER FOR WORKFORCE | $15,000 |
| PARTNERSHIP 4 KIDS | $15,000 |
| THE FURNITURE PROJECT | $12,500 |
| RESPECT | $10,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| OLLIE WEBB CENTER INC | $10,000 |
| URBAN LEAGUE OF NEBRASKA | $10,000 |
| WHISPERING ROOTS INC | $10,000 |
| OMAHA HOME FOR BOYS | $10,000 |
| YOUTH EMERGENCY SERVICES | $10,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY21–25, $205k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +7% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
27 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2025, 14 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 46% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $162k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- SFSIENA FRANCIS HOUSE5× · 2021–2025 · $47k · revenue +3%
- HCHOPE CENTER FOR KIDS INC2× · 2022–2023 · $45k · revenue +7%
- NDNEBRASKA DIAPER BANK2× · 2023–2025 · $40k · revenue +24%
Funded once
- BGBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OFone grant, 2022 · $30k
- LCLAKE CUNNINGHAM DEVELOPMENT TRUSTone grant, 2021 · $30k · revenue -87%
- CRCONNECTED ROOTS CARE CENTERgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue +73%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
One omaha empowers people where they live with education, training, and engagement to develop thriving neighborhoods.
To serve the community by cultivating generosity and strengthening nonprofits.
The mission of oedc is to implement economic development projects, housing, and community revitalization programs that create jobs, business ownership opportunities and other economic benefits for area residents.
Empowering under-resourced families to change their lives by discovering and overcoming barriers to success.
Our mission is to provide ownership opportunities through public and private partnerships, financing, and technical assistance. by working collaboratively, we aim to expand access to capital in underserved communities, empowering…
Health care services for the people of western nebraska and eastern wyoming.
Seeking to build a stronger, more caring community by forming partnerships with businesses, community experts, education & health & human service agencies to achieve targeted outcomes & sustained changes in community conditions which will…
To build the capacity of youth serving organizations, service providers, families and community to claim their voice, cultivate healing and take courageous action to improve their overall health and well being.
Omaha forus builds intentional community and creates equitable space in service to lgbtq+ individuals and families of eastern nebraska and western iowa.
Voices for children in nebraska is the independent voice building pathways to opportunity for all children and families through research, policy and community engagement.
We transform lives through organ and tissue donation.
The mission of the omaha sports commission is to foster a positive socio-economic impact on and a heightened awareness and image of omaha by attracting, hosting, & supporting amateur sporting events.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Easter Seals Nebraska and the most unlike its peers is Youth Emergency Services Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 30 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
53 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 53 of the 80 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds THE DURHAM MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds SIENA FRANCIS HOUSE ↗
- Who funds HOPE CENTER FOR KIDS INC ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA DIAPER BANK ↗
- Who funds RESPECT2 ↗
- Who funds YOUTH EMERGENCY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds QUALITY LIVING INC ↗
- Who funds OLLIE WEBB CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds LAKE CUNNINGHAM DEVELOPMENT TRUST ↗
- Who funds FURNITURE PROJECT OMAHA ↗
- Who funds HEARTLAND WORKERS CENTER ↗
- Who funds OMAHA PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CONNECTED ROOTS CARE CENTER ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF THE MIDLANDS ↗
- Who funds OPEN DOOR MISSION D/B/A OPEN DOOR MISSION & LYDIA HOUSE ↗
- Who funds 100 BLACK MEN OF OMAHA INC ↗
- Who funds WHISPERING ROOTS INC ↗
- Who funds CHILD SAVING INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds YMCA OF GREATER OMAHA ↗
- Who funds RESTORING DIGNITY ↗
- Who funds MICAH HOUSE CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds THE WELLBEING PARTNERS ↗
- Who funds INCLUSIVE COMMUNITIES ↗
- Who funds KIDS CAN COMMUNITY CENTER ↗
- Who funds THE VISITING NURSE HEALTH SERVICES ↗
- Who funds Omaha Botanical Center Inc ↗
- Who funds IGNITE NEBRASKA ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: The Lozier Foundation · The Sherwood Foundation · The Hawks Foundation · Robert B Daugherty Foundation · Mutual of Omaha Foundation · Suzanne & Walter Scott Foundation · The Charles and Mary Heider Family Foundation · Peter Kiewit Foundation · Weitz Family Foundation · Leland J & Dorothy H Olson Charitable Foundation · Nebraska Community Foundation · Gilbert M and Martha H Hitchcock Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Adah K Millard Charitable Trust funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.