· Private foundation
R Larry Beamer & Deborah Haynes Foundation
Its FY2020 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 43% of R LARRY BEAMER & DEBORAH HAYNES FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2020
- Under $10k13 grants · $25k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $85k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $65k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| EASTMINSTER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH | $65,000 |
| WICHITA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $25,357 |
| WICHITA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| KANSAS FOOD BANK | $15,000 |
| HABITAT FOR HUMANITY | $10,000 |
| THE LORD'S DINER | $10,000 |
| NEW INTERNATIONAL | $7,500 |
| YOUNG LIFE | $2,500 |
| GREATER WICHITA YMCA | $2,500 |
| WICHITA CHILDREN'S HOME | $2,500 |
| EXPLORATION PLACE | $2,500 |
| SALVATION ARMY | $1,000 |
| VIA CHRISTI FOUNDATION | $1,000 |
| PRATT COMM COLLEGE FOUNDATION | $1,000 |
| EMPORIA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION | $1,000 |
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 (FY18–20, $28k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 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 +85% since the first grant, against +58% for the ones you funded once.
10 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2020, 1 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (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 FY2020, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $11k 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
WICHITA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION4× · 2017–2020 · $110k · revenue +85%- TWTHE WICHITA CHILDREN'S HOME2× · 2018–2020 · $26k · revenue +27%
- NMNEW MISSION SYSTEMS INC3× · 2017–2020 · $23k · revenue +65%
Funded once
- GPGRACE POINT CHURCHone grant, 2017 · $5k
- CGCHARACTERWORKS GROUP INCone grant, 2019 · $5k
- KUKANSAS UNIVERSITY ENDOWMENTone grant, 2019 · $2k
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.
To bring glory to god by providing children with an excellent christ- centered education rooted in the word of god.
To protect and promote the well-being of children by providing ongoing support of the charitable mission of the kansas children's service league.
To drive economic growth and community advancement in the wichita region.
Kansas wesleyan university is a liberal arts college that promotes and integrates academic excellence, spiritual development, personal well-being, and social responsibility.
Our goal is to come alongside the church in its gospel-first mission to transform lives and transform culture.
Enriching western Kansas life through philanthropy, collaboration and leadership.
Wichita's littlest heroes (wlh) exists to provide hope, help, and happiness to families of children ages 0-18 in the kansas area who are battling life-threatening medical conditions. wlh strives to accomplish this be being a physical and…
Kansas action for children, inc. is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to shaping health, education and economic policy that improves the lives of kansas children and their families.
Helping people move to a better life through hope-filled care, services, and advocacy; calling all those of goodwill to join us
Kfv seeks to establish a kansas where god is honored, religious freedom flourishes, families thrive and life is cherished.
Engaging and aligning providers and stakeholders to establish Kansas as a role model for health care quality and a top performer in health care outcomes.
To engage in grant making to medical educational organizations and related charitable activities in the area of eye disease and vision disorder, and the care and treatment thereof.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wichita Foundation and the most unlike its peers is New Mission Systems Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
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 28 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 WICHITA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE WICHITA CHILDREN'S HOME ↗
- Who funds WICHITA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NEW MISSION SYSTEMS INC ↗
- Who funds KANSAS FOODBANK WAREHOUSE INC ↗
- Who funds EXPLORATION PLACE INC ↗
- Who funds KANSAS SOCIETY FOR CHILDREN WITH CHALLENGES ↗
- Who funds EMPORIA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF WICHITA KANSAS (2311) ↗
- Who funds YOUNG LIFE ↗
- Who funds PRATT COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CAIRN HEALTH INC ↗
- Who funds VICTORY IN THE VALLEY INC ↗
- Who funds VIA CHRISTI FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds KANSAS CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds DEAR NEIGHBOR MINISTRIES INC ↗
- Who funds GIRL SCOUTS OF KANSAS HEARTLAND 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: Berry Foundation Inc · Wichita Foundation · Kansas Health Foundation · Servant Foundation · Textron Charitable Trust Dtd 122353 · The Fidelity Bank Foundation · Bruce G Cochener Foundation · Belin Foundation · Lattner Family Foundation Inc · The Jessica Good Evans Charitable Foundation · DeVore Foundation Inc · K T Wiedemann Foundation Inc
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 R Larry Beamer & Deborah Haynes 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 R Larry Beamer & Deborah Haynes Foundation?
Find your warmest path to R Larry Beamer & Deborah Haynes 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.