Skip to content
Nichelson Family Foundation Co Gary L Nichelson at a glance

· Private foundation

Nichelson Family Foundation Co Gary L Nichelson

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$1k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$1k
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 2024.

Animals$14kRecreation & Sports$11kArts & Culture$1kReligion$500Human Services$10
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$3k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
US ARMY RANGER ASSOCIATION$1,000
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 (FY17–17, $510) land where the poverty rate runs at 39%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT: $10 → 14%DIAMOND WILLOW MINISTRIES: $500 → 40%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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$24k · 5 repeat orgs$3k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +34% since the first grant, against -2% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
5

Total granted

$24k
$3k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+34%
-2%

Still filing today

80%
100%

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
AnimalsHuman ServicesArts & CultureOther
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

  • TC
    THE CAT HOUSE
    8× · 2017–2024 · $6k · revenue +34%
  • LA
    LINCOLN ANIMAL AMBASSADORS
    6× · 2017–2024 · $3k · revenue +29%
  • HU
    HEARTS UNITED FOR ANIMALS
    4× · 2019–2022 · $2k · revenue +33%

Funded once

  • PP
    PATRIOTIC PRODUCTIONS INC
    one grant, 2017 · $1k · revenue -27%
  • FS
    FARM SENIOR DOG SANCTUARY INC
    one grant, 2024 · $500 · revenue -67%
  • DW
    DIAMOND WILLOW MINISTRIESgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $500 · revenue +323%
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
Wise Tails - a Senior Dog Sanctuary
—
2
Happy Acres Pet Rescue
Animals
3
Platte Ranch Forever Home Sanctuary
Animals
4
Donna's Love Pet Rescue
Animals
5
Barking Mad Animal Rescue

Rescue abused & abandoned dogs, urgent at risk of euthanasia dogs, medical needs & hospice dogs to provide veterinary care, rehabilitation, and find homes for dogs that become adoptable. Sanctuary til end of life is provided for those not…

Animals
6
The Adoptable Dog
Animals
7
Raskels Rescue
Animals
8
Veterans and Patriots Animal Coalition Inc

To provide animal rescue, safe and housing, food, and medical needs to homeless animals.

Animals
9
Paws Need People

Paws need people strive to rescue pets from shelters and provide a place they can stay until they are adopted. they provide pets to veterans through its therapy pet program.

—
10
Muttsnstuff

Rescue animals

Animals
11
Animal Rescue and Adoption Agency Inc

An animal rescue/adoption Agency. Rescued animals are from kill shelters or owner surrenders facing hardship then rehabbed/medical completed while in foster care then adopted into loving homes.

Animals
12
Their Lives Matter

Dog rescue and care nurturing finding a home

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mutts With a Mission; the most unlike its peers is Wounded Warrior Project 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

9 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. 9 of the 10 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE CAT HOUSE: $5,700 · AnimalsTHE CAT HOUSELINCOLN ANIMAL AMBASSADORS: $3,300 · AnimalsLINCOLN ANIMAL AMBASSADORSHEARTS UNITED FOR ANIMALS: $2,000 · AnimalsHEARTS UNITED FOR ANIMALSMUTTS WITH A MISSION: $1,850 · AnimalsMUTTS WITH A MISSIONFARM SENIOR DOG SANCTUARY INC: $500 · AnimalsUS ARMY RANGER ASSOCIATION INC: $11,500 · OtherUS ARMY RANGER ASSOCIATION INCBRAVE ANIMAL RESCUE INC: $500 · OtherPATRIOTIC PRODUCTIONS INC: $1,000 · Arts & CultureDIAMOND WILLOW MINISTRIES: $500 · Human Services+1 more: $10 · Human Services
Animals$13,350Other$12,000Arts & Culture$1,000Human Services$510

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 CAT HOUSE: $5,700 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetLINCOLN ANIMAL AMBASSADORS: $3,300 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetHEARTS UNITED FOR ANIMALS: $2,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMUTTS WITH A MISSION: $1,850 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetPATRIOTIC PRODUCTIONS INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFARM SENIOR DOG SANCTUARY INC: $500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetDIAMOND WILLOW MINISTRIES: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBRAVE ANIMAL RESCUE INC: $500 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $10 over 1y, 0.0% 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…Amazonsmile Foundation
Lincoln Community Foundation IncNE13.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Lincoln Community Foundation Inc · 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 Nichelson Family Foundation Co Gary L Nichelson funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Nichelson Family Foundation Co Gary L Nichelson. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 10 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 Nichelson Family Foundation Co Gary L Nichelson’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