· Public charity
Health Partners Initiative
Projects to improve health and fitness of communities.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 48% of HEALTH PARTNERS INITIATIVE’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 5 grants below total $204,515 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $226,935 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $22,420 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- $10k–50k3 grants · $77k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $127k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| LINCOLN MEDITERRANEAN MARKET | $77,048 |
| PUBLIC HEALTH SOLUTIONS IN CRETE | $50,000 |
| ASIAN COMMUNITY & CULTURAL CENTER | $34,333 |
| REMORA HEALTH LLC | $23,400 |
| EL CENTRO DE LAS AMERICAS | $19,734 |
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 (FY19–25, $613k) 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 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.
9 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 3 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, 26% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $150k 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
- ECEL CENTRO DE LAS AMERICAS7× · 2019–2025 · $598k · revenue +33%
- MCMALONE COMMUNITY CENTER6× · 2019–2024 · $434k · revenue ×19
- ACASIAN COMMUNITY AND CULTURAL CENTER7× · 2019–2025 · $170k · revenue +174%
Funded once
- LPLINCOLN PARKS AND RECREATIONone grant, 2024 · $33k
- GIGRAND ISLAND YOUNG WOMEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATIONgraduatedone grant, 2024 · $9k · revenue +227%
- LCLANCASTER COUNTY MEDICAL SOCIETYgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $9k · revenue +140%
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.
To promote, facilitate and develop or co-develop affordable housing in lincoln county, nebraska.
Providing advanced life service level support for nine local communities in lincoln county including damariscotta, newcastle, bremen, bristol, south bristol, nobleboro, jefferson and edgecomb
Building strong communities through access to quality affordable patient centered healthcare to the medically underserved population of Lincoln County, Montana in accordance with requirements set forth in 42 U.S.C. 254C(C)(3)(G).
To help young children thrive socially, emotionally and academically through high-quality early childhood education, and in partnership with their families and the community.
The purpose of the center is to organize programs and activities for the senior citizens of lincoln county.
To provide comprehensive outpatient mental health services to over 5400 individuals and their families in a consumer driven person centered delivery system. Approximately 15% of our staff members are our clients who are involved in a…
Serving the community to improve the quality of life for our senior citizens focusing on healthy eating, active living and socializing as well as assisting the community with durable medical supplies and some basic needs.
Partnering with individuals and families to encourage economic stability to gain independence through community-based solutions.
Early childhood development.
Educate and empower hispanic/latino individuals and familites towards thriving, self-sufficient, and healthy lives.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Family Service Association of Lincoln and the most unlike its peers is Cbol Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
11 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. 11 of the 19 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 EL CENTRO DE LAS AMERICAS ↗
- Who funds MALONE COMMUNITY CENTER ↗
- Who funds ASIAN COMMUNITY AND CULTURAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds MILKWORKS INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY CROPS ↗
- Who funds LINCOLN MEDICAL EDUCATION PARTNERSHIP ↗
- Who funds GRAND ISLAND YOUNG WOMEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds LANCASTER COUNTY MEDICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds CBOL Inc ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY ACTION OF NEBRASKA INC ↗
- Who funds FAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF LINCOLN ↗
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: Cooper Foundation · Lincoln Community Foundation Inc · United Way of Lincoln and Lancaster County · The Sherwood Foundation · Duncan Family Trust · Abel Foundation · Amazonsmile 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 Health Partners Initiative 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.