Skip to content
Hugo a and Thelma Aspegren Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Hugo a and Thelma Aspegren Charitable Trust

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$295k
Granted FY2025still arriving
15
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$46k
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.

Environment$628kEducation$344kAnimals$227kArts & Culture$174kHuman Services$168kYouth Development$154kReligion$138kCommunity Improvement$100kOther$0
02FY2025 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$16,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$2.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
COMMUNITY ACTION OF NEBRASKA INC$46,000
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY$32,250
ST PAUL UNITED METHODIST CHURCH$30,000
CONSERVATION NEBRASKA$25,000
PRAIRIE LOFT CENTER$25,000
NEBRASKA VOCATIONAL AGRICULTURAL FOUNDATION$25,000
PEOPLE'S CITY MISSION$16,000
FOOD BANK OF LINCOLN INC$16,000
MATT TALBOT KITCHEN AND OUTREACH$16,000
CAMP SONSHINE$14,000
THE FOUNDATION FOR LINCOLN PUBLIC SCHOOLS$10,000
WACHISKA AUDOBON SOCIETY INC$10,000
DIMENSIONS EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION$10,000
BRAVEBE CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER$10,000
JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT OF LINCOLN INC$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 (FY17–22, $40k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%YMCA OF LINCOLN: $20k → 13%YMCA OF LINCOLN: $10k → 13%YMCA OF LINCOLN: $5k → 13%YMCA OF LINCOLN: $5k → 13%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.

69%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.3M · 20 repeat orgs$573k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +40% since the first grant, against -13% for those funded once.

20 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

20
14

Total granted

$1.3M
$451k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+40%
-13%

Still filing today

85%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 54% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $122k 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
EnvironmentArts & CultureYouth DevelopmentEducationAnimalsHuman ServicesOther
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

  • CY
    CEDARS YOUTH SERVICES INC
    2× · 2020–2021 · $150k · revenue +55%
  • NA
    NATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION
    2× · 2023–2024 · $150k · revenue +15%
  • CN
    CONSERVATION NEBRASKA
    5× · 2020–2025 · $115k · revenue +119%

Funded once

  • LP
    LINCOLN PARKS FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2019 · $100k
  • EO
    EDUCARE OF LINCOLN INC
    one grant, 2022 · $82k · revenue -13%
  • NC
    NORTHEAST COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2021 · $50k · revenue -65%
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
Lincoln County Community Development Corporation

To promote, facilitate and develop or co-develop affordable housing in lincoln county, nebraska.

Philanthropy
2
The Nebraska Land Trust Inc

To foster the protection of agricultural, historical and natural resources on land in nebraska through education, partnering and permanent conservation.

Environment
3
Nebraska Academy of Sciences
Science & Tech
4
Lincoln University Aka Lincoln College

Lincoln college uniquely empowers students to realize their full potential

Education
5
Nebraska Safety Council

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

—
6
Lincoln Park Zoological Society

Lincoln park zoo is dedicated to connecting people with nature by providing a free, family-oriented wildlife experience in the heart of chicago and by advancing the highest quality of animal care, horticulture, education, science and…

Animals
7
Lincoln Area Chamber of Commerce

To Market Lincoln as the area of choice in which to live and do business, by attracting, assisting, retaining and promoting our members

—
8
Lincoln Land Community College Foundation

Cultivating and stewarding charitable gifts to support lincoln land community college students, programs and services.

Philanthropy
9
Nebraska Conservation Voters

Protect nebraska's natural legacy by educating voters, advocating for sound policies, and electing conservation champions.

—
10
Nebraska Alliance of Child Advocacy Centers

To enhance nebraska's response to child abuse.

Crime & Legal
11
Lincoln Animal Ambassadors

To address the root causes of animal homelessness in lincoln, nebraska and surrounding communites.

Animals
12
Cardinal Child Development Center

Non-profit learning center providing safe, affordable, high- quality, and reliable child care, for all young children in randolph, nebraska and the surrounding area.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Lincoln Children's Zoo; the most unlike its peers is Cedars Youth Services 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

33 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. 33 of the 40 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)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
33/33
Grantees still filing
19/33
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $217,850 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYST PAUL UNITED METHODIST CHURCH: $111,000 · OtherST PAUL UNITED METHODIST CHURCHLINCOLN PARKS FOUNDATION: $100,000 · OtherLINCOLN PARKS FOUNDATIONCOMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $53,525 · OtherCOMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIPWILLARD COMMUNITY CENTER: $47,300 · OtherWILLARD COMMUNITY CENTERNEBRASKA MASTER NATURALIST FDTN: $35,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY CROPS: $40,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY ACTION OF NEBRASKA INC: $46,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY ACTION OF NEBRASKA INC+9 more: $157,175 · Other+9 moreNATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION: $150,000 · EnvironmentNATIONAL ARBOR DAY FO…CONSERVATION NEBRASKA: $115,000 · EnvironmentCONSERVATION NEBRASKADucks Unlimited Inc: $100,000 · EnvironmentDucks Unlimited Inc+2 more: $20,000 · EnvironmentCEDARS YOUTH SERVICES INC: $150,000 · Arts & CultureCEDARS YOUTH S…THE FOUNDATION FOR LINCOLN PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $57,250 · Arts & CultureTHE FOUNDATION…MOURNING HOPE: $40,000 · Arts & CultureMOURNING HOPELINCOLN CHILDREN'S MUSEUM: $19,000 · Arts & CultureLINCOLN CHILDR…EDUCARE OF LINCOLN INC: $82,000 · EducationEDUCARE OF …DIMENSIONS EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $55,000 · EducationDIMENSIONS …NORTHEAST COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $50,000 · EducationNORTHEAST C…BRIGHT LIGHTS INC: $20,000 · EducationBRIGHT LIGH…LINCOLN CHILDREN'S ZOO: $110,000 · AnimalsLINCOLN C…NEBRASKA WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $36,725 · AnimalsNEBRASKA …NEBRASKA WILDLIFE REHAB INC: $20,000 · AnimalsNEBRASKA …CAPITAL HUMANE SOCIETY: $10,000 · AnimalsCAPITAL H…JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT OF LINCOLN INC: $50,000 · Youth DevelopmentCamp Sonshine: $34,000 · Youth DevelopmentPRAIRIE LOFT CENTER: $25,000 · Youth DevelopmentNEBRASKA VOCATIONAL AGRICULTURAL FOUNDATION: $25,000 · Youth DevelopmentMATT TALBOT KITCHEN & OUTREACH: $41,000 · Human ServicesYMCA OF LINCOLN: $40,000 · Human Services
Other$807,850Environment$385,000Arts & Culture$266,250Education$207,000Animals$176,725Youth Development$134,000Human Services$81,000

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 budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $217,850 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCEDARS YOUTH SERVICES INC: $150,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetNATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION: $150,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCONSERVATION NEBRASKA: $115,000 over 5y, 4.4% of budgetLINCOLN CHILDREN'S ZOO: $110,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetDucks Unlimited Inc: $100,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEDUCARE OF LINCOLN INC: $82,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetTHE FOUNDATION FOR LINCOLN PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $57,250 over 4y, 1.2% of budgetDIMENSIONS EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $55,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetJUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT OF LINCOLN INC: $50,000 over 5y, 1.6% of budgetNORTHEAST COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $50,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetWILLARD COMMUNITY CENTER: $47,300 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetCOMMUNITY ACTION OF NEBRASKA INC: $46,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetMATT TALBOT KITCHEN & OUTREACH: $41,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetMOURNING HOPE: $40,000 over 1y, 4.2% of budgetYMCA OF LINCOLN: $40,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetCOMMUNITY CROPS: $40,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetCamp Sonshine: $34,000 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetSt Paul Methodist Church Memorial Fund: $26,675 over 1y, 20% of budgetPRAIRIE LOFT CENTER: $25,000 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetCENTERPOINTE INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPEOPLE'S CITY MISSION: $22,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNEBRASKA WILDLIFE REHAB INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetLINCOLNLANCASTER COUNTY CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER: $20,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetBRIGHT LIGHTS INC: $20,000 over 2y, 5.1% of budgetLINCOLN CHILDREN'S MUSEUM: $19,000 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetFOOD BANK OF LINCOLN INC: $16,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCAPITAL HUMANE SOCIETY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetLINCOLN ARTS COUNCIL: $5,000 over 1y, 0.8% 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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Lincoln Community Fou…Cooper FoundationAssurity Life Foundat…Abel FoundationBettenhausen Family F…Rogers FoundationOlsson Family Foundat…Dolezal Family Founda…Duncan Family TrustD F Dillon FoundationSpreetail FoundationJames Stuart III Fami…
Lincoln Community Foundation IncNE49.7× affinity22 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Lincoln Community Foundation Inc · Cooper Foundation · Assurity Life Foundation · Abel Foundation · Bettenhausen Family Foundation · Rogers Foundation · Olsson Family Foundation · Dolezal Family Foundation · Duncan Family Trust · D F Dillon Foundation · Spreetail Foundation · James Stuart III Family 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 Hugo a and Thelma Aspegren Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Hugo a and Thelma Aspegren Charitable Trust. 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%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    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 40 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Hugo a and Thelma Aspegren’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