Skip to content
Greater Omaha Chamber Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Greater Omaha Chamber Foundation

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

$108k
Granted FY2024still arriving
6
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

Community Improvement$1.9MArts & Culture$180kPhilanthropy$23kEmployment$20kRecreation & Sports$10k
02FY2024 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 6 grants below total $58,125, the rows itemized in this filing. The $108,125 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $50,000 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

  • Under $10k4 grants · $28k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $30k
$7,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$9.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
OMAHA BY DESIGN$20,000
COLLEGE WORLD SERIES OF OMAHA INC$10,000
GREATER OMAHA ALLIANCE FOR BUSINESS ETHICS$7,500
GATEWAY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION$6,875
GREATER FREMONT DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL$6,875
SARPY COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL$6,875
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 (FY20–21, $1.3M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%OMAHA DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $1.0M → 12%OMAHA DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $335k → 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.

Grants abroad, by region: $25k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

East Asia and the Pacific$25k · 100% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: BIO INNOVATIONS MIDWEST 2024 SPONSORSHIP (EVENT WAS HELD IN OMAHA)

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.9M · 3 repeat orgs$138k to everyone else

3 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
6

Total granted

$1.9M
$80k

Still filing today

100%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $58k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’24
EducationHuman ServicesArts & CultureCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • OD
    OMAHA DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION
    2× · 2020–2021 · $1.3M · revenue -48% · 79% of their budget
  • AS
    ADVANCE SOUTHWEST IOWA CORPORATION
    5× · 2019–2023 · $425k · revenue +94% · 46% of their budget
  • BA
    BLUFFS ARTS COUNCIL
    5× · 2019–2023 · $180k · revenue -55%

Funded once

  • JS
    JOB SHARE CONNECT
    one grant, 2020 · $20k
  • CL
    CAREKNECT LLC
    one grant, 2021 · $20k
  • JI
    JUUK INC
    one grant, 2021 · $18k
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
Cozad Development Corporation

Foster Business Development in Cozad, NE

—
2
Omaha Economic Development Corporation

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.

—
3
Spencer Community Economic Development Inc

To promote economic development in Spencer, NE

Community Improvement
4
Greater Omaha Chamber Foundation

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

—
5
Iowa City Area Development Group Inc

The organization promotes, develops and advances the business community in iowa city and the surrounding area. in addition, the organization connects business and industry with federal, state and local resources to enable and stimulate…

—
6
Greater Omaha Chamber of Commerce

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

—
7
Western Iowa Development Assoc

Facilitate economic opportunity, business success, community engagement, prosperity, and quality of life for rural western iowa

—
8
Graettinger Economic Development Council

Engage in, assist and contribute to the support of economical and industrial development of the city of graettinger, iowa, including the assistance, encouragement and preservation of existing businesses and industries

Recreation & Sports
9
Washington Economic Development Group

Coordinate area economic development

Community Improvement
10
Nebraska City Area Economic Development Corporation

To promote the attraction, creation, retention and expansion of businesses and to enhance our quality of life in nebraska city and otoe county.

Community Improvement
11
Ashland Area Economic Development Corporation

Economic development in and around ashland nebraska.

Community Improvement
12
Albia Industrial Development Corporation

Promote the economic development and employment opportunities in monroe county, iowa, including the city of albia by advertising and publicizing the advantages of the area and assisting in locating, developing and making available suitable…

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Omaha Development Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Sarpy County Economic Development Corp. 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

11 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. 11 of the 16 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
5/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

OMAHA DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $1,335,000 · Human ServicesOMAHA DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATIONADVANCE SOUTHWEST IOWA CORPORATION: $425,000 · OtherADVANCE SOUTHWEST IOWA CORPORATIONBLUFFS ARTS COUNCIL: $180,000 · OtherBLUFFS ARTS COUNCIL+8 more: $96,875 · Other+8 moreOMAHA BY DESIGN: $20,000 · Arts & CultureOmaha Community Foundation: $15,000 · PhilanthropyGREATER OMAHA ALLIANCE FOR BUSINESS ETHICS: $7,500 · EducationGREATER FREMONT DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL: $6,875 · EducationGATEWAY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $6,875 · Community Improvement
Human Services$1,335,000Other$701,875Arts & Culture$20,000Philanthropy$15,000Education$14,375Community Improvement$6,875

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 budgetOMAHA DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $1,335,000 over 2y, 79% of budgetADVANCE SOUTHWEST IOWA CORPORATION: $425,000 over 5y, 46% of budgetBLUFFS ARTS COUNCIL: $180,000 over 5y, 2.7% of budgetOMAHA BY DESIGN: $20,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetOmaha Community Foundation: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOLLEGE WORLD SERIES OF OMAHA INC: $10,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetGREATER OMAHA ALLIANCE FOR BUSINESS ETHICS: $7,500 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetGREATER FREMONT DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL: $6,875 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSARPY COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORP: $6,875 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetGATEWAY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $6,875 over 1y, 2.8% 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Greater Omaha Chamber…
Greater Omaha Chamber of CommerceNE13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Greater Omaha Chamber of Commerce

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 Greater Omaha Chamber Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Greater Omaha Chamber Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Greater Omaha Chamber Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Greater Omaha Chamber Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 16 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 Greater Omaha Chamber’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