Skip to content
Neema Foundation Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Neema Foundation Charitable Trust

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$309k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
—
States reached
$309k
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, FY2018 to 2024.

International$983kHealth$175kHuman Services$40kFood & Nutrition$20kReligion$10k
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$308,548
Median grant
—
States reached
$1.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE MEENA CHILDREN'S ORGANIZATION$308,548
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.

US giving: 43% of grant dollars ($530k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 57% that went abroad ($697k) is mapped below.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY21–21, $110k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%TANZANIAN CHILDREN'S FUND: $110k → 8%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.

Beyond the US: 57% of all-years giving ($697k)

1 country, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
Tanzania$697k · 3 grants
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
04

Where the work is directed

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

About 30% of Neema Foundation Charitable Trust’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Neema Foundation Charitable Trustlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 57% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

77%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$947k · 5 repeat orgs$281k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +61% since the first grant, against -16% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
14

Total granted

$947k
$281k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+61%
-16%

Still filing today

40%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
InternationalHealthReligionHuman 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

  • Compassion International Incorporated
    2× · 2018–2019 · $96k · revenue +7%
  • BI
    BLACKBOX INTERNATIONAL
    2× · 2018–2019 · $78k · revenue +61%
  • AF
    ARKANSAS FAMILY ALLIANCE F/K/A WHITSONLIFE INC
    2× · 2018–2020 · $15k · revenue +489%

Funded once

  • TT
    THE TANZANIAN CHILDRENS FUND INC
    one grant, 2021 · $110k · revenue -24%
  • LI
    LIFE IMPACT NETWORK INC
    one grant, 2020 · $60k · revenue -16% · 48% of their budget
  • AP
    Arkansas Pharmacy Foundation
    one grant, 2020 · $50k · revenue -62%
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
Life Choices Resource Center Inc

To provide pregnancy testing (including ultrasound examinations), counseling, and referrals as needed (including post-abortion counseling) in our offices and through our 24-hour help-line.

—
2
Loving Arms - a Crisis Pregnancy Center

Sharing the love of christ while promoting sexual integrity and bringing life affirming services to those unprepared for pregnancy or hurt by abortion

Health
3
Life Choices Crisis Pregnancy Supp

Non-profit medical clinic educating and equipping individuals to make empowered decisions, providing pregnancy confirmation, and offering programs of prevention, intervention, and restoration.

Health
4
Crisis Pregnancy Center of Central Arkansas

Assisting crisis pregnancies

—
5
Life Choices Pregnancy Center Inc

We are an outreach ministry of jesus christ committed to providing compassionate guidance, education, and help for all involved prior to, during, and following an unplanned pregnancy.

Health
6
Pregnancy Care Center

The Pregnancy Care Center is a Christian organization to promote the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and to boldly endorse the sacredness of all human life, by providing comprehensive, practical services as enduring alternatives to abortion.

—
7
Life Choice Crisis Pregnancy Center Inc

Pregnancy resource center (prc) exists to prevent abortions and provide eternal truth through evidence based medical services and the gospel of jesus christ.

Health
8
South Texas Pregnancy Care Center

Crisis pregnancy counseling.

Health
9
Life Choices of North Central Louisiana

See schedule o - mission statement for part i line 1 covers this item

Health
10
Life Choice Care Center Inc

To provide physical and emotional support to women and their families facing unplanned pregnancies through a christ centered and biblically based approach.

Human Services
11
Life Choices Care Center

To provide support for pregnant women

Health
12
Crossroads Pregnancy Care

Crossroads Pregnancy Care is a Christ-centered and life-affirming ministry, providing hope, help, and healing to families affected by unplanned pregnancies or hurting from past abortions, and promoting sexual integrity. Social services…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northwest Arkansas Women's Resources; the most unlike its peers is The Gulf Coast Center. 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

12 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. 12 of the 19 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/12
Grantees still filing
7/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE MEENA CHILDREN'S ORGANIZATION: $697,458 · OtherTHE MEENA CHILDREN'S ORGANIZATIONFORT SMITH CHRISTIAN FAMILY SERVICE: $60,720 · OtherFORT SMITH CHRISTIAN FAMILY SERVICELIFE IMPACT NETWORK INC: $60,000 · OtherLIFE IMPACT NETWORK INC+7 more: $33,723 · OtherCompassion International Incorporated: $96,309 · InternationalCompassion Inter…BLACKBOX INTERNATIONAL: $77,575 · InternationalBLACKBOX INTERNA…+1 more: $1,000 · InternationalTHE TANZANIAN CHILDRENS FUND INC: $110,000 · Human ServicesTHE TANZAN…Arkansas Pharmacy Foundation: $50,000 · HealthRONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES OF ARKANSAS & NORTH LOUISIANA INC: $25,000 · Health+1 more: $1,000 · HealthARKANSAS FAMILY ALLIANCE F/K/A WHITSONLIFE INC: $15,000 · Religion+1 more: $130 · Religion
Other$851,901International$174,884Human Services$110,000Health$76,000Religion$15,130

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 TANZANIAN CHILDRENS FUND INC: $110,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetCompassion International Incorporated: $96,309 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBLACKBOX INTERNATIONAL: $77,575 over 2y, 14% of budgetLIFE IMPACT NETWORK INC: $60,000 over 1y, 48% of budgetArkansas Pharmacy Foundation: $50,000 over 1y, 8.9% of budgetRONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES OF ARKANSAS & NORTH LOUISIANA INC: $25,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetARKANSAS FAMILY ALLIANCE F/K/A WHITSONLIFE INC: $15,000 over 2y, 2.7% of budget1st Choice Pregnancy Resource Center Inc: $2,121 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCHICKS FOR CHILDREN INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetNORTHWEST ARKANSAS WOMEN'S RESOURCES: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetRAMAH INTERNATIONAL INC: $130 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.

Arkansas Community Fo…Natl Christian Charit…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Arkansas Community Foundation IncAR13.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Arkansas Community Foundation Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Neema Foundation Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Neema Foundation Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    1report 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, 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 19 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Neema’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