· Private foundation
Peter Kiewit 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2021–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k25 grants · $40k
- $10k–50k49 grants · $1.3M
- $50k–250k57 grants · $6.1M
- $250k+29 grants · $22M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Omaha Discovery Trust | $5,000,000 |
| University of Nebraska Foundation | $3,000,000 |
| University of Nebraska Foundation | $2,500,000 |
| Community Information Trust | $1,250,000 |
| Community Information Trust | $1,250,000 |
| University of Nebraska Foundation | $570,526 |
| University of Nebraska Foundation | $538,377 |
| City of Fremont | $500,000 |
| Joslyn Art Museum | $500,000 |
| Omaha Performing Arts Society | $500,000 |
| University of Nebraska Foundation | $475,286 |
| University of Nebraska Foundation | $454,013 |
| Nebraska Game and Parks Foundation | $450,000 |
| University of Nebraska Foundation | $395,122 |
| University of Nebraska Foundation | $389,976 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY21–25, $3.4M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those 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.
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 +12% since the first grant, against +1% for the ones you funded once.
115 repeat relationships — 62 still active in FY2025, 53 since wound down; 10 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, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.9M 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 FOUNDATION5× · 2021–2025 · $25M · revenue +12%
- ODOMAHA DISCOVERY TRUST4× · 2022–2025 · $21M · revenue +28% · 89% of their budget
- CICOMMUNITY INFORMATION TRUST4× · 2021–2025 · $3.9M · revenue +349%
Funded once
- FPFront Porch Investmentsone grant, 2023 · $2.0M · revenue +1% · 37% of their budget
- LCLAKE CUNNINGHAM DEVELOPMENT TRUSTone grant, 2022 · $1.5M · revenue -54% · 65% of their budget
- VTVETERANS TRUSTone grant, 2021 · $1.0M · revenue -33%
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 mission of oedc is to implement economic development projects, housing, and community revitalization programs that create jobs, business ownership opportunities and other economic benefits for area residents.
To increase business, employment, and investment in the greater omaha area.
Promotion of tourism, business, industry and history in the community of nebraska city, ne
Mission: community action of nebraska strives to alleviate poverty through enhancing program development, providing technical assistance, and advocating public policy to support all community action agencies in nebraska.
Our mission is to help nonprofits fulfill theirs.
Support the activities of the nebraska arts council and the nebraska humanities council doing business as humanities nebraska.
The nebraska civic engagement table works with nonprofits to increase voting and build an engaged nebraska.
Support for community colleges
To foster the protection of agricultural, historical and natural resources on land in nebraska through education, partnering and permanent conservation.
The organization's purpose is to ensure a fair and modern democracy in nebraska through research, education, and advocacy for policies and practices that promote participation in democracy.
To promote and coordinate economic development, education, and quality of life through strengthened communication in north central nebraska.
To promote, facilitate and develop or co-develop affordable housing in lincoln county, nebraska.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Nebraska Community Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Little Red Hen Theatre. 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 26 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) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.4% 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.
211 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. 211 of the 258 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 DOWNTOWN RIVERFRONT TRUST ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds OMAHA DISCOVERY TRUST ↗
- Who funds JOSLYN ART MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY INFORMATION TRUST ↗
- Who funds METROPOLITAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Collective For Youth ↗
- Who funds MUSEUM OF NEBRASKA ART ↗
- Who funds NORTHEAST COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Front Porch Investments ↗
- Who funds Creighton University ↗
- Who funds CENTRAL COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE MIDLANDS ↗
- Who funds LAKE CUNNINGHAM DEVELOPMENT TRUST ↗
- Who funds THE UNION FOR CONTEMPORARY ART INC ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA CHILDREN & FAMILIES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds KIDS CAN COMMUNITY CENTER ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA GAME AND PARKS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Omaha Community Foundation ↗
- Who funds NORTHSTAR FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF OMAHA INC ↗
- Who funds SPARK ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF THE MIDLANDS ↗
- Who funds VETERANS TRUST ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL & MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds COMPLETELY KIDS ↗
- Who funds COLLEGE POSSIBLE INC ↗
- Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF OMAHA ↗
- Who funds OPERA OMAHA INC ↗
- Who funds HOLY NAME HOUSING CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds THE DURHAM MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds MIDWEST HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUND INC ↗
- Who funds ROAM SHARE ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA ENTERPRISE FUND ↗
- Who funds YANNEY HERITAGE PARK FOUNDATION INC ↗
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: The Sherwood Foundation · Robert B Daugherty Foundation · The Lozier Foundation · Weitz Family Foundation · Nebraska Community Foundation · The Hawks Foundation · The Holland Foundation · The Charles and Mary Heider Family Foundation · Suzanne & Walter Scott Foundation · Mutual of Omaha Foundation · Union Pacific Foundation · Annette and Paul Smith Charitable Fund
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 Peter Kiewit 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Peter Kiewit Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Peter Kiewit Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.