· Private foundation
Slezak Family Charitable 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 FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k13 grants · $63k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $100k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| BREAKTHROUGH T1D | $100,000 |
| UNITED WAY OF THE MIDLANDS | $10,000 |
| MADONNA ABILITY ALLIANCE | $8,000 |
| PASADENA HUMANE SOCIETY | $7,500 |
| HEART MINISTRY CENTER | $7,500 |
| AMERICAN RED CROSS OF GREATER LOS ANGELES | $7,500 |
| CREIGHTON PREP | $5,000 |
| ST MARGARET MARY | $5,000 |
| MARIAN HIGH SCHOOL | $5,000 |
| COMMUNITY ALLIANCE | $5,000 |
| BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE MIDLANDS | $4,000 |
| GARUNA FOUNDATION | $2,000 |
| TEAMMATES | $2,000 |
| OMAHA PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION | $2,000 |
| NEBRASKA HUMANE SOCIETY | $2,000 |
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 (FY18–23, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 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.
16 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 6 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, 83% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $29k 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
- BTBREAKTHROUGH T1D9× · 2017–2025 · $917k · revenue +49%
- BGBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE MIDLANDS7× · 2019–2025 · $23k · revenue +14%
- NCNEW CASSEL FOUNDATION5× · 2017–2024 · $8k · revenue +331%
Funded once
- CJCOMBINED JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF GREATER BOSTON INCone grant, 2022 · $50k
- FBFOOD BANK FOR THE HEARTLANDgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $15k · revenue +43%
- PAPolice Athletics for Community Engagementone grant, 2018 · $5k · revenue -16%
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.
End hunger together.
One omaha empowers people where they live with education, training, and engagement to develop thriving neighborhoods.
The nebraska community foundation unleashes abundant local assets, inspires charitable giving, and connects ambitious people to build stronger communities and a greater nebraska.
To promote credit unions in nebraska
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.
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.
Unite realtor boards to be able to influence matters affecting real estate state wide, unify laws and regulations and promote education among members
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…
We transform lives through organ and tissue donation.
Our mission is to help nonprofits fulfill theirs.
To foster the protection of agricultural, historical and natural resources on land in nebraska through education, partnering and permanent conservation.
Seeking to build a stronger, more caring community by forming partnerships with businesses, community experts, education & health & human service agencies to achieve targeted outcomes & sustained changes in community conditions which will…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Nebraska Humane Society and the most unlike its peers is Breakthrough T1D. 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 43 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% 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.
18 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. 18 of the 35 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 BREAKTHROUGH T1D ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF THE MIDLANDS ↗
- Who funds Omaha Community Foundation ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE MIDLANDS ↗
- Who funds FOOD BANK FOR THE HEARTLAND ↗
- Who funds HEART MINISTRY CENTER ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds NEW CASSEL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PASADENA HUMANE ↗
- Who funds OMAHA PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Police Athletics for Community Engagement ↗
- Who funds CHILDRENS SHELTER OF HOPE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE GARUNA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA PGA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ARRUPE VIRTUAL LEARNING INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds IRVINGTON VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT ↗
- Who funds CORNHUSKER UNIT 241 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 Charles and Mary Heider Family Foundation · Stephen F Dwyer Memorial Foundation · The Lozier Foundation · The Sherwood Foundation · Mike and Michelle Berlin Family Foundation · Therese and Tim Fitzgibbons · Suzanne & Walter Scott Foundation · Mutual of Omaha Foundation · Jewish Federation of Omaha Foundation · The Hawks Foundation · Robert B Daugherty Foundation · Greater Horizons
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 Slezak Family Charitable 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.