Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Joseph a Horwath 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.

$805k
Granted FY2025still arriving
17
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$150k
Largest
01What you fund
0198% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Youth Development$1.1MHuman Services$875kReligion$730kHousing & Shelter$692kCommunity Improvement$550kPhilanthropy$435kCrime & Legal$205kEducation$76kOther$0
02FY2025 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $150k
  • $50k–250k9 grants · $645k
$50,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$7.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
RISE FKA DEFY VENTURES$150,000
COVENANT CEDARS BIBLE CAMP$75,000
GIRL SCOUTS SPIRIT OF NEB$75,000
OMAHA FOR US$70,000
Individual grant recipient$65,000
PARTNERSHIP 4 HOPE$60,000
HOPE CENTER FOR KIDS$50,000
INTERCULTURAL SENIOR CENTER$50,000
FIRST COVENANT CHURCH$50,000
OPEN DOOR MISSION$40,000
SIENNA FRANCIS HOUSE$40,000
MONTESSORI COOP SCHOOLS$25,000
THE YATES FUND$20,000
KALAHARI PEOPLES FUND$15,000
COMPASSION IN ACTION$10,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $1.6M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%OMAHA FOR US: $70k → 12%OMAHA FOR US: $35k → 12%OMAHA FOR US: $15k → 12%OPEN DOOR MISSION: $45k → 12%OPEN DOOR MISSION: $42k → 12%OPEN DOOR MISSION: $40k → 12%OPEN DOOR MISSION: $40k → 12%OPEN DOOR MISSION: $40k → 12%OPEN DOOR MISSION: $35k → 12%OPEN DOOR MISSION: $30k → 12%OPEN DOOR MISSION: $30k → 12%OMAHA HOME FOR BOYS: $40k → 12%OMAHA HOME FOR BOYS: $40k → 12%OMAHA HOME FOR BOYS: $25k → 12%OMAHA HOME FOR BOYS: $20k → 12%COMPASSION IN ACTION: $50k → 12%COMPASSION IN ACTION: $40k → 12%COMPASSION IN ACTION: $40k → 12%COMPASSION IN ACTION: $20k → 12%COMPASSION IN ACTION: $20k → 12%COMPASSION IN ACTION: $15k → 12%COMPASSION IN ACTION: $10k → 12%COMPASSION IN ACTION: $10k → 12%PARTNERSHIP 4 HOPE: $60k → 12%PARTNERSHIP 4 HOPE: $50k → 12%PARTNERSHIP 4 HOPE: $40k → 12%PARTNERSHIP 4 HOPE: $25k → 12%PARTNERSHIP 4 HOPE: $10k → 12%PARTNERSHIP 4 HOPE: $10k → 12%PARTNERSHIP 4 HOPE: $10k → 12%PARTNERSHIP 4 HOPE: $5k → 12%INTERCULTURAL SENIOR CENTER: $100k → 12%INTERCULTURAL SENIOR CENTER: $100k → 12%INTERCULTURAL SENIOR CENTER: $100k → 12%INTERCULTURAL SENIOR CENTER: $60k → 12%INTERCULTURAL SENIOR CENTER: $60k → 12%INTERCULTURAL SENIOR CENTER: $60k → 12%INTERCULTURAL SENIOR CENTER: $50k → 12%INTERCULTURAL SENIOR CENTER: $50k → 12%INTERCULTURAL SENIOR CENTER: $50k → 12%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 81% of Joseph a Horwath Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 98% of the giving stays in NE; read by stated purpose it is 19% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

Joseph a Horwath Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$4.7M · 19 repeat orgs$310k to everyone else

19 repeat relationships — 15 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
5

Total granted

$4.7M
$280k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-4%
+37%

Still filing today

58%
20%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $30k 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
Human ServicesHousing & ShelterYouth DevelopmentPhilanthropyCommunity ImprovementOther

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

  • IS
    INTERCULTURAL SENIOR CENTER
    9× · 2017–2025 · $630k · revenue +104%
  • SF
    SIENA FRANCIS HOUSE
    9× · 2017–2025 · $350k · revenue +36%
  • OF
    Omaha ForUs Inc
    3× · 2023–2025 · $120k · revenue +197%

Funded once

  • TY
    THE YATES FUND
    one grant, 2021 · $100k
  • CO
    CHURCH OF THE RESURRECTION
    one grant, 2024 · $60k
  • GN
    GOOD NEWS PRISON MINISTRY
    one grant, 2017 · $40k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Refugee Empowerment Center

To resettle refugees in nebraska and provide them the support they need to thrive.

2
Omaha Home for Boys Foundation

To support the mission of omaha home for boys.

Philanthropy
3
One Omaha

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

Community Improvement
4
Nebraska Youth Center

The center operates a group home for troubled youth, ages 12-18, in western nebraska.

5
Elevate Omaha Inc

To create a platform to elevate youth voice and equip young people to become leaders who advocate for themselves and their peers, provide insight about youth-driven solutions, and fund possibility to pave the way to a better future.

Community Improvement
6
Carole's House of Hope

Caroles House of Hope provides transitional living for young women and mothers who have aged out of foster care or have become homeless. Our home-like environment, paired with innovative programs and services, encourages self-sufficiency…

Public Benefit
7
Nebraska Enterprise Fund

The nebraska enterprise fund envisions a vibrant small business eco-system where every small and micro business has the opportunity to start, grow and prosper. the nebraska enterprise fund supports underserved communities by providing…

Philanthropy
8
Omaha 100

Our mission is to provide ownership opportunities through public and private partnerships, financing, and technical assistance. by working collaboratively, we aim to expand access to capital in underserved communities, empowering…

Housing & Shelter
9
Mutual of Omaha Foundation
Philanthropy
10
Hopespoke

Hopespoke is dedicated to meeting the mental health needs of children and their families in the lincoln area and surrounding communities through effective and flexible therapeutic partnerships and a commitment to advocacy and positive…

Health
11
Omaha Church Center Inc

None

12
Youth Care Inc

To transform the lives of children, adults, and families impacted by mental health, trauma and intellectual disabilities. Our goal is to change problematic and systematic behaviors and thinking to provide a positive outcome for…

Human Services

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Hope Center for Kids Inc and the most unlike its peers is Ventures for Excellence Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

05the grantee network

14 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 14 of the 26 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/14
Grantees still filing
4/14
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Individual grant recipient — $635,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCOVENANT CEDARS BIBLE CAMP — $330,000 · OtherCOVENANT CEDARS BIBLE CAMPGIRL SCOUTS SPIRIT OF NEB — $330,000 · OtherGIRL SCOUTS SPIRIT OF NEBFIRST COVENANT CHURCH — $300,000 · OtherFIRST COVENANT CHURCHTHE YATES FUND — $100,000 · Other+9 more — $259,000 · Other+9 moreINTERCULTURAL SENIOR CENTER — $630,000 · Human ServicesINTERCULTURAL SENIOR CENTEROPEN DOOR MISSION D/B/A OPEN DOOR MISSION & LYDIA HOUSE — $302,000 · Human ServicesOPEN DOOR MISSION D/B/A OPEN DOOR MI…PARTNERSHIP 4 HOPE INC — $210,000 · Human ServicesPARTNERSHIP 4 HOPE INCCOMPASSION IN ACTION INC — $205,000 · Human ServicesCOMPASSION IN ACTION INCTHE OMAHA HOME FOR BOYS — $125,000 · Human ServicesTHE OMAHA HOME FOR BOYSOmaha ForUs Inc — $120,000 · Human ServicesOmaha ForUs IncHOPE CENTER FOR KIDS INC — $315,000 · Youth DevelopmentHOPE CENTER F…GIRL SCOUTS SPIRIT OF NEBRASKA — $258,000 · Youth DevelopmentGIRL SCOUTS S…VENTURES FOR EXCELLENCE FOUNDATION — $435,000 · PhilanthropyVENTURES …SIENA FRANCIS HOUSE — $350,000 · Housing & ShelterSTEPHEN CENTER INC — $40,000 · Housing & ShelterYATES FUND — $40,000 · Community Improvement
Other$1,954,000Human Services$1,592,000Youth Development$573,000Philanthropy$435,000Housing & Shelter$390,000Community Improvement$40,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetINTERCULTURAL SENIOR CENTER — $630,000 over 9y, 10% of budgetVENTURES FOR EXCELLENCE FOUNDATION — $435,000 over 8y, 72% of budgetSIENA FRANCIS HOUSE — $350,000 over 9y, 0.4% of budgetHOPE CENTER FOR KIDS INC — $315,000 over 8y, 2.8% of budgetOPEN DOOR MISSION D/B/A OPEN DOOR MISSION & LYDIA HOUSE — $302,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetGIRL SCOUTS SPIRIT OF NEBRASKA — $258,000 over 4y, 1.1% of budgetPARTNERSHIP 4 HOPE INC — $210,000 over 8y, 29% of budgetCOMPASSION IN ACTION INC — $205,000 over 8y, 51% of budgetTHE OMAHA HOME FOR BOYS — $125,000 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetOmaha ForUs Inc — $120,000 over 3y, 11% of budgetYATES FUND — $40,000 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetSTEPHEN CENTER INC — $40,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetKALAHARI PEOPLES FUND INC — $25,000 over 2y, 5.1% of budgetOUTRSPACES — $25,000 over 2y, 24% of budget
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 INTERCULTURAL SENIOR CENTER
  • Who funds VENTURES FOR EXCELLENCE FOUNDATION
  • Who funds SIENA FRANCIS HOUSE
  • Who funds HOPE CENTER FOR KIDS INC
  • Who funds OPEN DOOR MISSION D/B/A OPEN DOOR MISSION & LYDIA HOUSE
  • Who funds GIRL SCOUTS SPIRIT OF NEBRASKA
  • Who funds PARTNERSHIP 4 HOPE INC
  • Who funds COMPASSION IN ACTION INC
  • Who funds THE OMAHA HOME FOR BOYS
  • Who funds Omaha ForUs Inc
  • Who funds YATES FUND
  • Who funds STEPHEN CENTER INC
  • Who funds KALAHARI PEOPLES FUND INC
  • Who funds OUTRSPACES

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.

United Way of the MidlandsNE19.9× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United Way of the Midlands · The Lozier Foundation · The Sherwood Foundation · Mutual of Omaha Foundation · Todd and Mary Heistand Family Foundation · Suzanne & Walter Scott Foundation · The Hawks Foundation · The Charles and Mary Heider Family Foundation · Leland J & Dorothy H Olson Charitable Foundation · Robert B Daugherty Foundation · Weitz Family Foundation · Nebraska Community 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 Joseph a Horwath Foundation 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%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 · 0–10%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 26 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph