Skip to content
Ja Woollam Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Ja Woollam Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$238k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$215k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Religion$2.3MRecreation & Sports$1.2MEducation$970kEnvironment$721kArts & Culture$80kPhilanthropy$31kPublic Benefit$13kScience & Tech$4kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $215k
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$29M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION$215,376
SPRING CREEK PRAIRIE AUDUBON$10,000
WYOMING PUBLIC MEDIA$5,000
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY$5,000
SHERIDAN COMMUNITY LAND TRUST$3,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 51% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 10%EDGERTON EXPLORIT CENTER: $15k → 8%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $15k → 17%NMSU FOUNDATION: $15k → 23%LITTLE TRAVERSE CONSERVANCY: $100k → 9%OVAL BEACH PRESERVATION SOCIETY: $10k → 10%KEWEENAW COMMUNITY FOREST COMPANY: $21k → 10%LAND CONSERVANCY OF WEST MICHIGAN: $25k → 11%HEADWATERS LAND CONSERVANCY: $60k → 11%ANGLERS OF TEH AU SABLE: $20k → 14%PRETTY LAKE VACATION CAMP: $66k → 14%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $85k → 7%NEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $10k → 23%ST JAMES TOWNSHIP: $2.2M → 9%LAND CONSERVANCY OF WEST MICHIGAN: $10k → 11%HEADWATERS LAND CONSERVANCY: $30k → 11%PRETTY LAKE VACATION CAMP: $30k → 14%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $50k → 7%ST JAMES TOWNSHIP: $10k → 9%HEADWATERS LAND CONSERVANCY: $17k → 11%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $10k → 7%HEADWATERS LAND CONSERVANCY: $10k → 11%NEBRASKA TRAILS FOUNDATION: $100k → 13%MICHIGAN MARITIME MUSEUM: $10k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA: $25k → 13%UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION: $215k → 13%UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION: $200k → 13%UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION: $120k → 13%UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION: $65k → 13%UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION: $60k → 13%UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION: $50k → 13%UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION: $28k → 13%SPRING CREEK PRAIRIE AUDUBON: $10k → 13%LINCOLN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $20k → 13%SPRING CREEK PRAIRIE AUDUBON: $10k → 13%ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION: $20k → 13%SPRING CREEK PRAIRIE AUDUBON: $10k → 13%NEBRASKA LAND TRUST: $15k → 13%NEBRASKA LAND TRUST: $15k → 13%NEBRASKA LAND TRUST: $15k → 13%WACHISKA AUDUBON SOCIETY: $36k → 13%LINCOLN PARKS FOUNDATION: $1.0M → 13%SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY COLLEGE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $24k → 13%SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY COLLEGE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $24k → 13%SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY COLLEGE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $24k → 13%SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY COLLEGE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $24k → 13%SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY COLLEGE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $24k → 13%SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY COLLEGE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $19k → 13%SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY COLLEGE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $19k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

ME
WI
MI
NY
WY
CA
UT
NE
VA
MD
NM
DC
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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$4.7M · 25 repeat orgs$412k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +83% since the first grant, against +40% for those funded once.

25 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 21 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

25
35

Total granted

$4.7M
$412k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+83%
+40%

Still filing today

56%
60%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
EnvironmentEducationArts & CultureRecreation & SportsPublic BenefitAnimalsOther
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

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION
    7× · 2017–2025 · $738k · revenue +70%
  • SC
    SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY COLLEGE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION
    7× · 2017–2023 · $158k · revenue +170%
  • PL
    PRETTY LAKE VACATION CAMP INC
    5× · 2017–2024 · $102k · revenue +111%

Funded once

  • LT
    Little Traverse Conservancy Incgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $100k · revenue +60%
  • NT
    NEBRASKA TRAILS FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2019 · $100k · revenue -88%
  • WA
    WACHISKA AUDUBON SOCIETY INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $36k · revenue +110%
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
Natural Resources Foundation of

To protect wisconsin's lands, waters, and wildlife by providing funding, leading partnerships, and connecting all people with nature.

—
2
North Dakota Natural Resources Trust
—
3
Minnesota Land Trust

The minnesota land trust protects and restores minnesota's most vital natural lands in order to provide wildlife habitat, clean water, outdoor experiences and scenic beauty for generations to come.

Environment
4
Nebraska Game and Parks Foundation

The organization is focused on the future of parks, wildlife management and conservation of nebraska.

Environment
5
Kansas Land Trust Inc

To protect and preserve lands of natural, ecological, scenic, historic, agricultural, or recreational significance in kansas.

Environment
6
Conservation Minnesota

Conservation minnesota's mission is to turn our shared conservation values into state priorities and provide you with the information you need to make decisions for your family, community and future.

Environment
7
Legacy Land Conservancy

Safeguard southern michigan's land and water to support diverse, resilient, and thriving communities - forever

Environment
8
Grand Traverse Regional Land Conservancy

The mission of gtrlc is to protect significant natural, scenic and farm lands and advance land stewardship now and for future generations.

Environment
9
Nd Natural Resources Conservation Trust

To promote the conservation of natural resources in the state of north dakota

Environment
10
Nantucket Conservation Foundation Inc

The nantucket conservation foundation owns, protects, and stewards over 9,000 acres of land and coastal shoreline, conserves nantucket's rare and significant natural resources, and engages in impactful ecological research to inform…

Environment
11
Glacial Lakes Conservancy Inc

Glacial Lakes Conservancy, as a land trust, is a nonprofit organization that, as part of its mission, actively works to conserve land by undertaking or assisting in land or conservation easement acquisitions.

Environment
12
The Little Forks Conservancy Inc

To permanently protect and improve natural environments in Mid-Michigan by leading and inspiring actions that conserve vital habitats and waterways for the benefit of our entire community.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Nebraska Land Trust Inc; the most unlike its peers is Nebraska Academy of Sciences. 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

40 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. 40 of the 63 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
11
Early backer (in before they grew)
38/40
Grantees still filing
26/40
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ST JAMES TOWNSHIP: $2,250,270 · OtherST JAMES TOWNSHIPLINCOLN PARKS FOUNDATION: $1,010,000 · OtherLINCOLN PARKS FOUNDATIONTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $174,765 · Other+32 more: $336,125 · Other+32 moreUNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION: $737,900 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF NEBRA…SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY COLLEGE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $158,400 · EducationSOUTHEAST COMMUNITY…+3 more: $30,532 · EducationHEADWATERS LAND CONSERVANCY: $116,300 · EnvironmentHEADWATER…Little Traverse Conservancy Inc: $100,000 · EnvironmentLittle Tr…THE NEBRASKA LAND TRUST INC: $65,000 · EnvironmentTHE NEBRA…WACHISKA AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $35,840 · EnvironmentWACHISKA …Land Conservancy of West Michigan: $35,000 · EnvironmentLand Cons…NATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION: $22,000 · EnvironmentKEWEENAW COMMUNITY FOREST COMPANY: $21,332 · EnvironmentSHERIDAN COMMUNITY LAND TRUST: $15,000 · EnvironmentNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $15,000 · Environment+4 more: $18,500 · EnvironmentPRETTY LAKE VACATION CAMP INC: $102,000 · Recreation & SportsCHARLEVOIX AREA COMMUNITY POOL: $5,000 · Recreation & SportsLincoln Community Foundation Inc: $20,000 · PhilanthropyKALAMAZOO COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $7,530 · PhilanthropyHEARTLAND UNITED WAY INC: $2,000 · Philanthropy+1 more: $1,000 · PhilanthropyMICHIGAN MARITIME MUSEUM INC: $10,000 · Arts & CultureTHE FOUNDATION FOR LINCOLN PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $10,000 · Arts & CultureOVAL BEACH PRESERVATION SOCIETY: $10,000 · Public BenefitOPENSKY POLICY INSTITUTE: $2,500 · Public Benefit
Other$3,771,160Education$926,832Environment$443,972Recreation & Sports$107,000Philanthropy$30,530Arts & Culture$20,000Public Benefit$12,500

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION: $737,900 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $174,765 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetSOUTHEAST COMMUNITY COLLEGE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $158,400 over 7y, 0.6% of budgetHEADWATERS LAND CONSERVANCY: $116,300 over 4y, 6.4% of budgetPRETTY LAKE VACATION CAMP INC: $102,000 over 5y, 4.5% of budgetLittle Traverse Conservancy Inc: $100,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetNEBRASKA TRAILS FOUNDATION INC: $100,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetTHE NEBRASKA LAND TRUST INC: $65,000 over 6y, 3.2% of budgetWACHISKA AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $35,840 over 1y, 18% of budgetLand Conservancy of West Michigan: $35,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetNew Mexico State Univ Fdn Inc: $24,532 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION: $22,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetKEWEENAW COMMUNITY FOREST COMPANY: $21,332 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetLincoln Community Foundation Inc: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSHERIDAN COMMUNITY LAND TRUST: $15,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $10,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetOVAL BEACH PRESERVATION SOCIETY: $10,000 over 1y, 46% of budgetMICHIGAN MARITIME MUSEUM INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetNET FOUNDATION FOR TELEVISION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE FOUNDATION FOR LINCOLN PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetTHE GROUNDWATER FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetKALAMAZOO COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $7,530 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE WILDERNESS SOCIETY: $6,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCHARLEVOIX AREA COMMUNITY POOL: $5,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetSTAND FOR SCHOOLS: $5,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetTROUT UNLIMITED MICHIGAN COUNCIL: $5,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetNebraska Conservation Voters: $2,500 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetOPENSKY POLICY INSTITUTE: $2,500 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetTHE NEBRASKA COMMUNITIES PLAYHOUSE: $2,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetDOG & CAT SHELTER INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetHEARTLAND UNITED WAY INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNEBRASKA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES: $1,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetNEBRASKA CHILDREN & FAMILIES FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE FOOD GROUP INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSIX RIVERS LAND CONSERVANCY FKA SIX RIVERS REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetGATHERING WATERS INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

Cooper FoundationLincoln Community Fou…Nebraska Community Fo…The Sherwood Foundati…First Interstate Banc…Lee and Debbie Stuart…Assurity Life Foundat…Duncan Family TrustThe Holland FoundationLand Trust Alliance I…The Lozier FoundationCharles Stewart Mott …
Cooper FoundationNE26.1× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Cooper Foundation · Lincoln Community Foundation Inc · Nebraska Community Foundation · The Sherwood Foundation · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · Lee and Debbie Stuart Family Foundation · Assurity Life Foundation · Duncan Family Trust · The Holland Foundation · Land Trust Alliance Inc · The Lozier Foundation · Charles Stewart Mott 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 Ja Woollam Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ja Woollam Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    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 63 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 Ja Woollam’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