Skip to content
Bomhoff Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Bomhoff Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$1.6M
Granted FY2024still arriving
13
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$208k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Human Services$2.9MHealth$933kPublic Safety & Disaster$901kHousing & Shelter$744kFood & Nutrition$303kPhilanthropy$240kArts & Culture$229kEducation$173kOther$0
02FY2024 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $12k
  • $50k–250k10 grants · $1.6M
$122,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$14M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SALVATION ARMY$208,000
HEARTSPRING$208,000
EMBERHOPE INC$208,000
AMERICAN RED CROSS OF KANSAS$208,000
WICHITA CHILDRENS HOME$208,000
HUMANKIND MINISTRIES$200,000
KANSAS AVIATION MUSEUM$122,000
TRINITY ACADEMY$83,000
BOTANICA THE WICHITA GARDENS$75,000
SENIOR SERVICES OF WICHITA$60,000
LORD'S DINER$12,000
Individual grant recipient$8,000
MARK ARTS$5,000
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 (FY17–24, $1.9M) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%SENIOR SERVICES OF WICHITA: $60k → 16%SENIOR SERVICES INC OF WICHITA: $25k → 16%SENIOR SERVICES OF WICHITA: $23k → 16%RAINBOWS UNITED INC: $40k → 16%RAINBOWS UNITED INC: $20k → 16%RAINBOWS UNITED INC: $15k → 16%RAINBOWS UNITED INC: $10k → 16%WICHITA CHILDRENS HOME: $208k → 16%WICHITA CHILDRENS HOME: $130k → 16%WICHITA CHILDRENS HOME: $117k → 16%WICHITA CHILDRENS HOME: $104k → 16%WICHITA CHILDRENS HOME: $72k → 16%WICHITA CHILDRENS HOME: $72k → 16%WICHITA CHILDRENS HOME: $65k → 16%WICHITA CHILDRENS HOME: $59k → 16%EMBERHOPE INC: $208k → 16%EMBERHOPE INC: $143k → 16%EMBERHOPE INC: $130k → 16%EMBERHOPE INC: $117k → 16%EMBERHOPE INC: $104k → 16%EMBERHOPE INC: $72k → 16%EMBERHOPE INC: $65k → 16%EMBERHOPE INC: $59k → 16%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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$6.8M · 22 repeat orgs$39k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +36% since the first grant, against -1% for those funded once.

22 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2024, 10 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

22
7

Total granted

$6.8M
$34k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+36%
-1%

Still filing today

64%
43%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesArts & CultureEducationHealthPhilanthropyReligionOther
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

  • HI
    HEARTSPRING INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $933k · revenue +30%
  • EI
    EMBERHOPE INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $897k · revenue +585%
  • TW
    THE WICHITA CHILDREN'S HOME
    8× · 2017–2024 · $826k · revenue +99%

Funded once

  • WICHITA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2018 · $15k · revenue -1%
  • UM
    UNITED METHODIST OPEN DOOR
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue -13%
  • MO
    MEALS ON WHEELS INC
    one grant, 2020 · $4k
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
North Central Kansas Housing Opportunities Inc
Community Improvement
2
Kansas Humane Society of Wichita Kansas

The kansas humane society is a community resource for pets and people, dedicated to enhancing the welfare of all companion animals.

Animals
3
Kansas City Christian School Association

To bring glory to god by providing children with an excellent christ- centered education rooted in the word of god.

—
4
Wichita-Sedgwick County Historical Museum Association

To educate the community and its visitors about local history by collecting, preserving and interpreting materials reflecting the heritage of wichita and sedgwick county

Arts & Culture
5
Wichita Habitat for Humanity Inc

At wichita habitat for humanity, we believe everyone deserves the strength, stability, and independence that comes with a safe, affordable home. we partner with hardworking individuals and families in our community, empowering them to…

Housing & Shelter
6
Wichita Falls Faith Mission Inc

To provide christ-centered programs and services that lead the homeless toward self-sufficiency.

Religion
7
Kansas Wesleyan University

Kansas wesleyan university is a liberal arts college that promotes and integrates academic excellence, spiritual development, personal well-being, and social responsibility.

Education
8
Wichitas Littlest Heroes

Wichita's littlest heroes (wlh) exists to provide hope, help, and happiness to families of children ages 0-18 in the kansas area who are battling life-threatening medical conditions. wlh strives to accomplish this be being a physical and…

Human Services
9
Wichita County Heritage Society Dba Kell House Heritage Center

Inspire and educate the community to engage in preservation through the kell house heritage center.

Arts & Culture
10
Kansas Children's Discovery Center Inc

The kansas children's discovery center enhances the lives of children and enriches the communities it serves.

Arts & Culture
11
Kansas City Pet Project

Leading the way in creating a compassionate, safe community for pets and people through progressive lifesaving programs and services, community resources, and educational opportunities.

Animals
12
Kansas Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies

Out vision is: all communities across kansas value and support a high-quality early childhood care and education system.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Senior Services Inc of Wichita; the most unlike its peers is The Finney County Kansas Historical Society Inc. 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

18 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. 18 of the 30 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)
18/18
Grantees still filing
13/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SALVATION ARMY: $932,500 · OtherSALVATION ARMYAMERICAN RED CROSS OF KANSAS: $901,000 · OtherAMERICAN RED CROSS OF KANSASINTER-FAITH MINISTRIES: $118,750 · OtherLORD'S DINER: $95,000 · OtherRONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES: $90,000 · OtherTRINITY ACADEMY INCORPORATED: $158,000 · OtherTRINITY ACADEMY INCORPORATEDBOTANICA INC: $130,000 · Other+11 more: $132,000 · OtherEMBERHOPE INC: $897,000 · Human ServicesEMBERHOPE INCTHE WICHITA CHILDREN'S HOME: $825,500 · Human ServicesTHE WICHITA CHILDREN'S HOMESENIOR SERVICES INC OF WICHITA: $108,000 · Human ServicesSENIOR SERVICES INC OF WICHITARAINBOWS UNITED INC: $85,000 · Human ServicesHEARTSPRING INC: $932,500 · HealthHEARTSPRING INCHUMANKIND MINISTRIES WICHITA INC: $743,750 · ReligionHUMANKIND MI…UNITED WAY OF THE PLAINS INC: $240,000 · PhilanthropyKANSAS AVIATION MUSEUM INC: $201,000 · Arts & CultureKANSAS PUBLIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE: $21,000 · Arts & Culture+2 more: $5,500 · Arts & CultureKANSAS FOODBANK WAREHOUSE INC: $203,500 · Food & Nutrition
Other$2,557,250Human Services$1,915,500Health$932,500Religion$743,750Philanthropy$240,000Arts & Culture$227,500Food & Nutrition$203,500

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetHEARTSPRING INC: $932,500 over 8y, 0.8% of budgetEMBERHOPE INC: $897,000 over 8y, 1.4% of budgetTHE WICHITA CHILDREN'S HOME: $825,500 over 8y, 1.5% of budgetHUMANKIND MINISTRIES WICHITA INC: $743,750 over 6y, 6.5% of budgetUNITED WAY OF THE PLAINS INC: $240,000 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetKANSAS FOODBANK WAREHOUSE INC: $203,500 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetKANSAS AVIATION MUSEUM INC: $201,000 over 5y, 11% of budgetTRINITY ACADEMY INCORPORATED: $158,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetBOTANICA INC: $130,000 over 2y, 4.4% of budgetSENIOR SERVICES INC OF WICHITA: $108,000 over 3y, 1.9% of budgetRAINBOWS UNITED INC: $85,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetSUNLIGHT CHILDREN'S SERVICES INC: $60,000 over 4y, 1.8% of budgetKANSAS PUBLIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE: $21,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetWICHITA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNITED METHODIST OPEN DOOR: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE FINNEY COUNTY KANSAS HISTORICAL SOCIETY INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetDOC'S FRIENDS INC: $500 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.

  • Who funds HEARTSPRING INC ↗
  • Who funds EMBERHOPE INC ↗
  • Who funds THE WICHITA CHILDREN'S HOME ↗
  • Who funds HUMANKIND MINISTRIES WICHITA INC ↗
  • Who funds UNITED WAY OF THE PLAINS INC ↗
  • Who funds KANSAS FOODBANK WAREHOUSE INC ↗
  • Who funds KANSAS AVIATION MUSEUM INC ↗
  • Who funds TRINITY ACADEMY INCORPORATED ↗
  • Who funds BOTANICA INC ↗
  • Who funds SENIOR SERVICES INC OF WICHITA ↗
  • Who funds RAINBOWS UNITED INC ↗
  • Who funds SUNLIGHT CHILDREN'S SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds KANSAS PUBLIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE ↗
  • Who funds WICHITA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds UNITED METHODIST OPEN DOOR ↗
  • Who funds MARK ARTS INC ↗
  • Who funds THE FINNEY COUNTY KANSAS HISTORICAL SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds DOC'S FRIENDS INC ↗

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.

Berry Foundation IncTextron Charitable Tr…Wichita FoundationDwane L and Velma Lun…United Way of the Pla…Ima FoundationThe Fidelity Bank Fou…DeVore Foundation IncDaniel J Taylor Famil…Mosby Lincoln Foundat…Goebel Family-Star Lu…The Sunderland Founda…
Berry Foundation IncKS30.5× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Berry Foundation Inc · Textron Charitable Trust Dtd 122353 · Wichita Foundation · Dwane L and Velma Lunt Wallace Charitable Foundation · United Way of the Plains Inc · Ima Foundation · The Fidelity Bank Foundation · DeVore Foundation Inc · Daniel J Taylor Family Charitable Foundation · Mosby Lincoln Foundation · Goebel Family-Star Lumber Charitable Trust · The Sunderland 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 Bomhoff Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Bomhoff Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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 30 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 Bomhoff’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