Skip to content
Alegent Creighton Health at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Alegent Creighton Health

As an affiliate of commonspirit health, we make the healing presence of god known in our world by improving the health of the people we serve, especially those who are vulnerable, while we advance social justice for all.

$1.6M
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$1.3M
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 2025.

Health$3.5MReligion$331kCommunity Improvement$111kFood & Nutrition$60kEducation$50kPhilanthropy$48kCivil Rights$30kCrime & Legal$20kOther$0
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 10 grants below total $1,502,881, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,573,326 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $70,445 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k8 grants · $133k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
  • $250k+1 grant · $1.3M
$20,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.1B
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHI HEALTH FOUNDATION$1,320,381
OMAHA ARCHIOCESAN EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC$50,000
RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES IN OMAHA$20,000
RISE ACADEMY$20,000
WHISPERING ROOTS INC$20,000
TOGETHER INC OF METROPOLITAN OMAHA$20,000
SAVING GRACE PERISHABLE FOOD RESCUE$20,000
THE CREW CENTER$12,500
BUFFALO COUNTY COMMUNITY HEALTH PARTNERS INC$10,000
UNITED WAY OF THE MIDLANDS$10,000
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 (FY25–25, $20k) 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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%TOGETHER INC OF METROPOLITAN OMAHA: $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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.8M · 9 repeat orgs$362k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +34% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
6

Total granted

$3.8M
$250k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+34%
0%

Still filing today

56%
83%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $113k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthHuman ServicesEducationArts & CulturePhilanthropyInternationalOther
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

  • CH
    CHI HEALTH FOUNDATION
    9× · 2017–2025 · $3.2M · revenue +146%
  • BC
    BUFFALO COUNTY COMMUNITY HEALTH PARTNERS INC
    3× · 2017–2025 · $80k · revenue +40%
  • UW
    UNITED WAY OF THE MIDLANDS
    4× · 2021–2025 · $48k · revenue +28%

Funded once

  • AH
    ALEGENT HEALTH-IMMANUEL MEDICAL CENTER
    one grant, 2017 · $121k · revenue +11%
  • CM
    COMUNIDAD MAYA PIXAN IXIM
    one grant, 2024 · $50k · revenue 0%
  • MC
    MOSAIC COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
    one grant, 2024 · $44k · revenue 0%
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
Regional West Health Services

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

Health
2
One Omaha

One omaha empowers people where they live with education, training, and engagement to develop thriving neighborhoods.

Community Improvement
3
Mill City Farmers Market Inc

Mission: to inspire and nurture a healthy community by building a local, sustainable, and organic food economy in a vibrant experiential marketplace.vision: to be a nationally recognized marketplace model that connects, educates, and…

—
4
Mn Community Measurement

Mn community measurement empowers stakeholders with meaningful information to drive improvement.

Health
5
Midwest Dairy Association

Midwest dairy works with others to give consumers an excellent dairy experience increasing sales, fostering innovation, and inspiring consumer confidence of dairy products and practices.

—
6
Iowa City Area Chamber of Commerce

Our mission is to inspire the iowa city area to be greater by: 1) elevating business, 2) investing in strategic initiatives, and 3) advocating for the economic resiliency of the greater community.

—
7
Heartland Community Health Network Inc

Heartland community health network exists to support and strengthen its federally qualified health center members through collaboration, information-sharing and integration of administrative, fiscal and clinical operations.

Health
8
Greater Omaha Chamber of Commerce

To increase business, employment, and investment in the greater omaha area.

—
9
Community Action of Nebraska Inc

Mission: community action of nebraska strives to alleviate poverty through enhancing program development, providing technical assistance, and advocating public policy to support all community action agencies in nebraska.

Community Improvement
10
Michigan Assoc of Community Mental Health Boards

Assisting the community mental health boards of michigan in developing methods for mental health planning, care and treatment.

—
11
Minneapolis Regional Chamber of Commerce

Creating powerful advocacy to enhance economic vitality in the minneapolis-st. paul region.

—
12
Community Health Care Inc

Community health care provides the communities we serve with excellence in patient-centered medical, dental, and behavioral health care that is compassionate, affordable, and accessible.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chi Health Foundation; the most unlike its peers is The Crew Center. 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

16 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. 16 of the 21 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)
16/16
Grantees still filing
10/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CHI HEALTH FOUNDATION: $3,179,021 · HealthCHI HEALTH FOUNDATIONALEGENT HEALTH-IMMANUEL MEDICAL CENTER: $121,380 · Health+3 more: $137,500 · HealthNEBRASKA SYNOD OF THE EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH IN AMERICA: $171,331 · OtherNEBRASKA SYNO…CATHOLIC FUTURE FOUNDATION OF NORTHEAST NEBRASKA: $150,000 · OtherCATHOLIC FUTU…SISTERS OF MERCY OF THE AMERICAS WEST MIDWEST COMMUNITY INC: $52,000 · OtherSISTERS OF ME…SISTERS OF ST FRANCIS OF COLORADO SPRINGS: $20,000 · OtherNEBRASKA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY: $17,000 · OtherSAVING GRACE PERISHABLE FOOD RESCUE INC: $20,000 · OtherRISE ACADEMY: $20,000 · Other+3 more: $29,500 · Other+3 moreMOSAIC COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: $44,185 · Human ServicesTOGETHER INC OF METROPOLITAN OMAHA: $20,000 · Human ServicesCOMUNIDAD MAYA PIXAN IXIM: $50,000 · Arts & CultureUNITED WAY OF THE MIDLANDS: $47,500 · PhilanthropyAFRICAN AMERICAN EMPOWERMENT NETWORK IN: $30,000 · EducationWHISPERING ROOTS INC: $20,000 · International
Health$3,437,901Other$479,831Human Services$64,185Arts & Culture$50,000Philanthropy$47,500Education$30,000International$20,000

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 budgetCHI HEALTH FOUNDATION: $3,179,021 over 9y, 24% of budgetALEGENT HEALTH-IMMANUEL MEDICAL CENTER: $121,380 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBUFFALO COUNTY COMMUNITY HEALTH PARTNERS INC: $80,000 over 3y, 4.5% of budgetCOMUNIDAD MAYA PIXAN IXIM: $50,000 over 1y, 5.4% of budgetUNITED WAY OF THE MIDLANDS: $47,500 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetMOSAIC COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: $44,185 over 1y, 6.3% of budgetCLINIC WITH A HEART INC: $37,500 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetAFRICAN AMERICAN EMPOWERMENT NETWORK IN: $30,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetSAVING GRACE PERISHABLE FOOD RESCUE INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetRONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES IN OMAHA INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetNEBRASKA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY: $17,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetTHE CREW CENTER: $12,500 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetMATURA ACTION CORPORATION: $7,000 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.

The Sherwood Foundati…Weitz Family Foundati…The Lozier FoundationAlegent Health - Berg…Charles E Lakin Found…Leland J & Dorothy H …Immanuel Community Vi…Union Pacific Foundat…Suzanne & Walter Scot…Mutual of Omaha Found…United Way of the Mid…Peter Kiewit Foundati…
The Sherwood FoundationNE21.6× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Sherwood Foundation · Weitz Family Foundation · The Lozier Foundation · Alegent Health - Bergan Mercy Health System · Charles E Lakin Foundation Inc · Leland J & Dorothy H Olson Charitable Foundation · Immanuel Community Vision Foundation · Union Pacific Foundation · Suzanne & Walter Scott Foundation · Mutual of Omaha Foundation · United Way of the Midlands · Peter Kiewit 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 Alegent Creighton Health funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Alegent Creighton Health. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%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 · 0–30%
    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 21 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 Alegent Creighton Health’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