Skip to content
Children's Hospital & Medical Center at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Children's Hospital & Medical Center

To improve the life of every child - through exceptional care, advocacy, research and education.

$20M
Granted FY2024still arriving
11
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$3.0M
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 2024.

Health$24MEducation$5.9MYouth Development$166kHuman Services$135kArts & Culture$110kFood & Nutrition$35kCrime & Legal$25k
02FY2024 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 11 grants below total $3,150,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $20,133,355 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $16,983,355 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 · FY2024

  • $10k–50k10 grants · $150k
  • $250k+1 grant · $3.0M
$15,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.6B
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA COLLEGE OF MEDICINE$3,000,000
LENDING LINK$15,000
RESTORING DIGNITY$15,000
THE VALLEY CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER$15,000
COMPLETELY KIDS$15,000
FOUNDATION FOR LINCOLN PUBLIC SCHOOLS$15,000
LEGAL AID OF NEBRASKA$15,000
NEBRASKA DIAPER BANK$15,000
NELSON MANDELA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL INC$15,000
BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF MIDLANDS$15,000
CEDARS YOUTH SERVICES INC$15,000
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 (FY20–24, $135k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%HASTINGS FAMILY YMCA: $15k → 11%THE VALLEY CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $15k → 11%HASTINGS FAMILY YMCA: $10k → 11%THE VALLEY CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $10k → 11%FAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF LINCOLN: $10k → 13%YMCA OF GREATER OMAHA: $15k → 12%YMCA OF GREATER OMAHA: $10k → 12%RESTORING DIGNITY: $15k → 12%RESTORING DIGNITY: $10k → 12%LENDING LINK: $15k → 12%LENDING LINK: $10k → 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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$30M · 19 repeat orgs$106k to everyone else

19 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
6

Total granted

$30M
$106k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+29%
+50%

Still filing today

95%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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 ServicesYouth DevelopmentHealthArts & CultureCrime & LegalEducationOther
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

  • NP
    NEBRASKA PEDIATRIC PRACTICE INC
    7× · 2017–2023 · $9.6M · revenue +53%
  • CY
    CEDARS YOUTH SERVICES INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $60k · revenue +55%
  • CK
    COMPLETELY KIDS
    4× · 2021–2024 · $50k · revenue +85%

Funded once

  • NF
    NORTHSTAR FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2021 · $56k · revenue -14%
  • SH
    SARPYCASS HEALTH DEPARTMENT
    one grant, 2020 · $10k
  • HC
    Harrison County Home and Public Hea
    one grant, 2020 · $10k
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
One Omaha

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

Community Improvement
2
Nebraska Early Childhood Collaborative

The nebraska early childhood collaborative harnesses the potential of providers to deliver high-quality early learning opportunities through access to business resources, innovative partnerships, and educational support.

—
3
Lutheran Family Services of Ne Inc

Lutheran family services of nebraska, inc.'s (lfs) mission is to express god's love for all people by providing quality human care services that build and strengthen individual, family and community life. our vision is saftey, hope and…

Human Services
4
Nebraska Association for the Education of Young Children Inc

Promote professional development activities; advocate for issues relating to children and families; serve as a resource for local affiliates and for other agencies involved in working with and for children & families; disseminate…

Youth Development
5
Nebraska Alliance of Child Advocacy Centers

To enhance nebraska's response to child abuse.

Crime & Legal
6
Nebraska Children & Families Foundation

Nebraska children's mission is to create positive change for children through community engagement. our vision is a nebraska where all children will have the resources and support to reach their full potential. our values are (1)…

Philanthropy
7
Voices for Children in Nebraska

Voices for children in nebraska is the independent voice building pathways to opportunity for all children and families through research, policy and community engagement.

—
8
Omaha Early Learning Centers Inc

To provide safe, nurturing, and high-quality child care for infants and toddlers.

—
9
Eastern Nebraska Community Action Partnership

Encap provides high-impact programs to help people get ahead.

—
10
Lincoln Total Community Action Inc

Early childhood development.

—
11
Nebraska Safety Council

Provide education and leadership to empower people to live safe and healthy.

—
12
Lincoln Medical Education Partnership

To provide family practice training and, in support of that end, relevant healthcare education and services.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Family Service Association of Lincoln; the most unlike its peers is Interfaith Health Service. 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

22 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. 22 of the 25 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)
22/22
Grantees still filing
15/22
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA: $20,125,628 · OtherBOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA+4 more: $80,000 · OtherNEBRASKA PEDIATRIC PRACTICE INC: $9,591,215 · HealthNEBRASKA PEDIATRIC PRACTICE INC+2 more: $45,000 · HealthNORTHSTAR FOUNDATION: $56,192 · Youth DevelopmentCOMPLETELY KIDS: $50,000 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS INCORPORATED OF OMAHA: $25,000 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE MIDLANDS: $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentYMCA OF GREATER OMAHA: $25,000 · Human ServicesRESTORING DIGNITY: $25,000 · Human ServicesEconomic Empowerment Center: $25,000 · Human ServicesTHE YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF HASTINGS NEBRASKA: $25,000 · Human ServicesTHE VALLEY CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER INC: $25,000 · Human ServicesFAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF LINCOLN: $10,000 · Human ServicesCEDARS YOUTH SERVICES INC: $60,000 · Arts & CultureTHE FOUNDATION FOR LINCOLN PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $50,000 · Arts & CultureNEBRASKA APPLESEED CENTER FOR LAW IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST: $35,000 · Crime & LegalLEGAL AID OF NEBRASKA: $25,000 · Crime & LegalNELSON MANDELA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL INC: $25,000 · EducationEDUCARE OF LINCOLN INC: $25,000 · EducationNEBRASKA DIAPER BANK: $25,000 · Food & Nutrition
Other$20,205,628Health$9,636,215Youth Development$141,192Human Services$135,000Arts & Culture$110,000Crime & Legal$60,000Education$50,000Food & Nutrition$25,000

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 budgetNEBRASKA PEDIATRIC PRACTICE INC: $9,591,215 over 7y, 5.0% of budgetCEDARS YOUTH SERVICES INC: $60,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetNORTHSTAR FOUNDATION: $56,192 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetCOMPLETELY KIDS: $50,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetTHE FOUNDATION FOR LINCOLN PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $50,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetCHICANO AWARENESS CENTER INC: $35,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetNEBRASKA APPLESEED CENTER FOR LAW IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST: $35,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetONEWORLD COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS INC: $35,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNEBRASKA DIAPER BANK: $25,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetYMCA OF GREATER OMAHA: $25,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetRESTORING DIGNITY: $25,000 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetEconomic Empowerment Center: $25,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF OMAHA: $25,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetTHE YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF HASTINGS NEBRASKA: $25,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetNELSON MANDELA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL INC: $25,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetEDUCARE OF LINCOLN INC: $25,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF THE MIDLANDS: $25,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetLEGAL AID OF NEBRASKA: $25,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE VALLEY CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER INC: $25,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetINTERFAITH HEALTH SERVICE: $10,000 over 1y, 5.4% of budgetFAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF LINCOLN: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE MIDLANDS: $10,000 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…The Lozier FoundationImmanuel Community Vi…Mutual of Omaha Found…Nebraska Community Fo…United Way of the Mid…Leland J & Dorothy H …Peter Kiewit Foundati…Lincoln Community Fou…Suzanne & Walter Scot…Cooper FoundationThe Hawks Foundation
The Sherwood FoundationNE31.8× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Sherwood Foundation · The Lozier Foundation · Immanuel Community Vision Foundation · Mutual of Omaha Foundation · Nebraska Community Foundation · United Way of the Midlands · Leland J & Dorothy H Olson Charitable Foundation · Peter Kiewit Foundation · Lincoln Community Foundation Inc · Suzanne & Walter Scott Foundation · Cooper Foundation · The Hawks 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 Children's Hospital & Medical Center funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Children's Hospital & Medical Center. 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%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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 25 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Children's Hospital & Medical Center’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