· Public charity
Singer Foundation
The mission of the foundation is to distribute funds for charitable purposes in the areas of civic, cultural, health, education and social services
Read this first · the figures below need context
81% of Singer Foundation’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Omaha Community Foundation, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 5 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2023, the last year Singer Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 6 organizations, $770k. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 7 grants below total $770,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $796,500 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $26,500 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2023
- $10k–50k3 grants · $45k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $380k
- $250k+1 grant · $345k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION | $345,000 |
| OMAHA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $180,000 |
| ST PATRICK'S CATHOLIC CHURCH | $125,000 |
| B&B BOXING ACADEMY INC | $75,000 |
| LAKE CUNNINGHAM DEVELOPMENT TRUST | $25,000 |
| PROJECT HARMONY | $10,000 |
| CALVIN CREST CAMP CONFERENCE AND RETREAT CENTER INC | $10,000 |
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 (FY21–22, $35k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 43% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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.
9 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2023, 5 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call). Read against FY2023, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
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, 18% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $70k 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
- BSB&B SPORTS ACADEMY3× · 2022–2024 · $200k · revenue +541%
- SBSTONY BROOK FOUNDATION INC3× · 2019–2022 · $92k · revenue +206%
- SFSEAL-NSW FAMILY FOUNDATION4× · 2019–2022 · $41k · revenue +38%
Funded once
- NPNEBRASKA PHILANTHROPIC TRUSTone grant, 2020 · $100k · revenue -89%
- APAZUSA PACIFIC UNIVERSITYone grant, 2021 · $40k · revenue -19%
- CHCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL & MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATIONone grant, 2021 · $26k · revenue -51%
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 the omaha sports commission is to foster a positive socio-economic impact on and a heightened awareness and image of omaha by attracting, hosting, & supporting amateur sporting events.
The nmu foundation will establish and foster relationships to generate resources that benefit the strategic goals of northern michigan university.
The nebraska community foundation unleashes abundant local assets, inspires charitable giving, and connects ambitious people to build stronger communities and a greater nebraska.
Stand for schools supports nebraska's public schools, working to advance policies that make them stronger while opposing policies that would weaken them.
The council of indepependent nebraska colleges foundation exists to provide operating funds and scholarship support for students attending nebraska's independent institutions of excellence.
The mission of the omaha parks foundation is to improve, promote, preserve, protect, and support omaha's parks and recreation system. we engage in initiatives that make our parks system more accessible, inclusive, and beneficial to all…
The Foundation was created to assist in the promotion, development and enhancement of the financial resources for Washburn University of Topeka, as well as to receive and hold in trust any assets given in benefit of the University.
To foster the protection of agricultural, historical and natural resources on land in nebraska through education, partnering and permanent conservation.
Our mission is to help nonprofits fulfill theirs.
To increase business, employment, and investment in the greater omaha area.
The unf charitable gift fund was established to enable donors to make charitable donations to multiple organizations, including the university of nebraska.
The university of iowa facilities corporation acquires and holds property for the benefit and use of the university of iowa.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of Nebraska Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Friends of Ostomates Worldwide - Usa Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 26 years old; the field is 25. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 15% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 8% 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.
31 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. 31 of the 34 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 Omaha Community Foundation ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds B&B SPORTS ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds LAKE CUNNINGHAM DEVELOPMENT TRUST ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA PHILANTHROPIC TRUST ↗
- Who funds STONY BROOK FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds AVENUE SCHOLARS ↗
- Who funds SEAL-NSW FAMILY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WESTSIDE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds AZUSA PACIFIC UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds CALVIN CREST CAMP CONFERENCE AND RETREAT CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL & MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BALLET NEBRASKA ↗
- Who funds Phi Delta Theta Foundation ↗
- Who funds THE BRAIN ANEURYSM FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Justin Cowboy Crisis Fund Inc ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF OSTOMATES WORLDWIDE - USA INC ↗
- Who funds CUES FUND ↗
- Who funds EDGE AND CENTER INC THE CHURCH ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA PGA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds OMAHA RODEO INC ↗
- Who funds STATE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds City of Omaha Police Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds PROJECT HARMONY ↗
- Who funds HEART MINISTRY CENTER ↗
- Who funds MIDLANDS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds OMAHA CONSERVATORY OF MUSIC ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA FFA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE MIDLANDS ↗
- Who funds OMAHA ZOO FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HOPE CENTER FOR KIDS 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 Lozier Foundation · The Charles and Mary Heider Family Foundation · Robert B Daugherty Foundation · Suzanne & Walter Scott Foundation · The Sherwood Foundation · Walter Scott Family Foundation · The Hawks Foundation · Jewish Federation of Omaha Foundation · Peter Kiewit Foundation · Growing Good Foundation · The Giving 3 Foundation · Richard Brooke 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 Singer 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 Singer Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Singer 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.