· Private foundation
Kinman-Oldfield Fam Fdn Tr
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k34 grants · $115k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $119k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION | $118,750 |
| HASTINGS PUBLIC SCHOOL FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| SYRACUSE FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| NORTH BEND CENTRAL FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| OAKLANDCRAIG PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| SUTTON EDUCATION FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| GORDONRUSHVILLE SCHOOLS | $5,000 |
| CEDAR BLUFFS SCHOOL FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| ADAMS CENTRAL SCHOOLS FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| WAHOO PUBLIC SCHOOL FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| MID-NEBRASKA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| ALLIANCE PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| FRIENDS OF OAKLAND FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| SIOUXLAND COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $4,500 |
| LYONS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $4,500 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 93% of your 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +195% since the first grant, against +50% for the ones you funded once.
46 repeat relationships — 30 still active in FY2025, 16 since wound down; 1 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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k 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
- UOUNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION8× · 2017–2025 · $745k · revenue +70%
- HPHASTINGS PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION6× · 2017–2025 · $82k · revenue +195%
- ACADAMS CENTRAL SCHOOLS FOUNDATION8× · 2017–2025 · $60k · revenue +661%
Funded once
- TWTHE WILLA CATHER FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $11k · revenue +50%
- GPGORDON-RUSHVILLE PUBLIC SCHOOLSone grant, 2021 · $5k
- MEMEAD EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue +59%
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.
The function of the north dakota university system foundation is to support, enrich, advance and improve higher education in the state of north dakota, and to assist its students, faculty and staff.
This foundation develops resources that enhance the quality of educaion for students following the mission of the sioux city community school disrict
The hastings community foundation works to perpetuate and enrich the quality of life in hastings and the surrounding area through the prudent investment and management of philanthropic donations.
The Northampton Community College Foundation, raises, invests and manages private resources for Northampton Community College, it's students, and it's staff.
The foundation is organized to further the growth and development of private colleges and universities of higher education in iowa.
Stand for schools supports nebraska's public schools, working to advance policies that make them stronger while opposing policies that would weaken them.
The kellogg community college foundation generates and encourages philanthropic giving and manages funds exclusively for kcc to enhance the quality of education while building stronger communities.
Valley City State University Foundation aids in the advancement of Valley City State University by awarding scholarships and by promoting the University. Support comes primarily from contributions by individuals and businesses, fundraising…
A conduit for public contributions and other fund-raising activities which benefit programs at Cleveland Community College
Supporting, enhancing and expanding opporutnites throughout cedar falls community schools.
Scholarships and financial assistance to promote educational opportunities at kankakee community college
To receive and administer funds for educational purposes.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Nebraska Community Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Syracuse Foundation Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 34 years old; the field is 23. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 17% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 9% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
17 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. 17 of the 67 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 UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HASTINGS PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ADAMS CENTRAL SCHOOLS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ALLIANCE PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF OAKLAND FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds HASTINGS COLLEGE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds KEARNEY AREA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LYONS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SYRACUSE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds WAHOO PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY HOSPITAL HEALTH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MID-NEBRASKA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SIOUXLAND COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
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: Nebraska Community Foundation · Land O'Lakes Foundation · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · Kitty M Perkins Foundation · The Graff Charitable Foundation Inc Co P Mark Graff · LeRoy Thom Jean Thom and T-L Foundation · Hirschfeld Family Foundation Inc · Robert B Daugherty Foundation · The Sherwood Foundation · Renaissance Charitable Foundation Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · American Endowment 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 Kinman-Oldfield Fam Fdn Tr 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.